X. The Prophecy Of Daniel Chapter Twelve

Two Timelines Of Apocalypse - Part Three (Section X)  

 

(Footnotes/Extended Details also on separate page)

 

X.  The Prophecy Of Daniel Chapter Twelve

St. Michael's Intercession

The Last Three Trumpets And Where They Go

The Seven Thunders, The Nullification Of A Timeline, And A Paradox

What The Prophet Daniel Was Given To See

 

 

This prophecy concerns the second timeline only, although it is not immediately apparent. It can apply to the first as well, because otherwise something might be given away which was better kept hidden until it is time.

When the book, sealed with seven seals, is first seen held by 'him that sat on the throne' in Apocalypse chapter five, no one at first is able to read it: "And no man was able, neither in heaven, nor on earth, nor under the earth, to open the book, nor to look on it. And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open the book, nor to see it" (Apoc. 5:3-4).

But the Lamb is able to open the book; and he takes it from the right hand of  "him that sat on the throne" (Apoc. 5:7).

One of the ancients speaks to St. John: "And one of the ancients said to me: Weep not; behold the lion of the tribe of Juda, the root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof". This is probably the prophet Daniel himself, who was told to "shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time appointed:" (Dan. 12:4). The Knox translation words it thus: "Keep this revelation locked away; sealed up the record of it must be until the hour appointed".

It should be pointed out before we continue that 'this revelation' spoken of by Daniel's apparition which is to be 'locked away' is not the book, 'sealed with seven seals', of Apocalypse chapter five. When that book appears, St. John wept because 'no man was found worthy to open the book, nor to see it'.

 

Whatever is written therein is not itself a prophecy. The events described with the opening of the seals in Apocalypse is not 'hidden, and locked away' as they are described in chapter six (and eight). This means that something else is written therein. [112]

Since it contains everyone's names who were ever alive in the world, even if they were never named, and since the Lamb is the Redeemer of all mankind, as well as its Judge, He is the only one Who is worthy to open the book and to see it.

 

The way it is presented also suggests this. When the book first makes its appearance (Apoc. 5:1), a strong angel asks "Who is worthy to open the book, etc."; the thing is, if it is a book of names, could anyone whose name is written inside it be worthy to open it ? The Challoner translates it as 'no man is worthy, etc.' while Knox gives it as "none should be found worthy to open the scroll, etc" (Apoc. 5:4), or "there was no one in heaven, or on earth...who could open the scroll" (Apoc. 5:3). Our Lord and His Mother had, of course, no original sin; and further, Our Lord was born of one who had no original sin. As everyone's names without exception have to be in this book, by this interpretation, so also is Our Lord's, as He was derived from Adam, but sinless, through Mary. [*112A]

 

 

St. Michael's Intercession

 

12:1  But at that time shall Michael rise up, the great prince, who standeth for the children of thy people: and a time shall come such as never was from the time that nations began even until that time. And at that time shall thy people be saved, every one that shall be found written in the book.

K~  Time, then, that Michael should be up and doing; Michael, that high lord who is guardian of thy race. Distress shall then be, such as never was since the world began; and in that hour of distress thy fellow-countrymen shall win deliverance, all whose names are found written when the record lies open.

 

St. Michael the Archangel. He led the angels in Heaven against the Dragon and his angels (Apoc. 12:7-9). Although that vision of Apocalypse consisted of 'signs appearing in heaven', signifying the Woman and the Dragon, this is removed from the Beatific Vision (e.g. the four living creatures, and the ancients, do not appear in chapter twelve). They represented the spiritual conflict then underway, by 'signs in heaven', almost as a kind of metaphorical simulation or animation; or that is how it comes through on text from one describing visions as these.

It so follows, then, that the vision is not representative of the long-term conflict between the Church and the devil. It is too specific for that. This battle did happen around 1960 (or 1958).

We have also seen St. Michael in Apocalypse chapter ten, in which he stood 'upon the sea, and upon the earth', as if restraining the coming of the beast which comes up out of the sea, and the beast which comes up out of the earth. What is not certain is where else he appears in Apocalypse (other than chapter twelve, naturally). That answer is not for now. [113]

In the above section, Angel Of Chapter Ten Revisited, we have discussed how St. Michael's actions in chapter ten seemed to be blocking the coming the of two beasts of chapter thirteen. We had said that "there is no guarantee that in the first timeline the book of life is opened" and in the previous section (Where Are The Four Living Creatures ?) we have seen why. Coming right around again full circle, we might ask again: What did the devil hope to accomplish by his attack on Heaven (in 1960 or 1958) ? 

Sr. Lucia told Fr. Fuentes: "the devil is in the mood for engaging in a decisive battle against the Blessed Virgin. And the devil knows what it is that offends God the most, and which in a short space of time will gain for him the greatest number of souls. Thus the devil does everything to overcome souls consecrated to God". The first sentence speaks of a different battle than the rest, though they are related, but they are not the same event: The woman and the dragon were seen as 'signs' in heaven (Apoc. 12:1,3), representing spiritual forces on earth (the Church and Russia's errors / the 'mystery of iniquity'), whilst the battle in heaven saw St. Michael and his angels in battle against the dragon and his angels (Apoc. 12:7), which is an actual battle not in the world. As well: At the first encounter, between the woman and the dragon, the 'man-child' (representing the pope-elect) was delivered, then he was 'taken up to God, and to his throne' which meant the first encounter was on earth, though represented by the 'signs in heaven'; but the second encounter, the battle proper, was purely in Heaven. These are approximations of the spiritual conflicts but not overly generalized to the point it becomes meaningless.

Perhaps the devil attempted to get to the 'man-child' who was 'taken up to God, and to his throne', as he had tried to get to him on earth. As well, he was attempting to attack the Blessed Virgin, Who as represented by the four living creatures is continually interceding for souls, in order to interrupt Her continual intercession: "And they rested not day and night, saying: Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, who was, and who is, and who is to come" (Apoc. 4:8). Perhaps both objectives were the same, if the 'man-child' is with the four living creatures at this very moment, ever since the papacy was 'taken out of the way' (2 Thess. 2:7). [114]

In the second timeline, then, St. Michael defended Heaven from a concerted attack which the devil thought he could, if not win, then at least do some harm. [*115] He has thus already 'stood for the children of thy people' (Daniel's). In the first timeline, it is more difficult to state the equivalent, as it would not have happened that way. But if it were the first timeline, he would already have stood up, when he appeared in St. John's prophecy to declare in no uncertain terms:

"And he swore by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things which are therein; and the earth, and the things which are in it; and the sea, and the things which are therein: That time shall be no longer" (Apoc. 10:6).

 

This alternative intercession would have been bitter-sweet as the timeline of the opening of the seals would then no longer happen. However, no one would have known this.

The Last Three Trumpets And Where They Go

Chapter ten is placed in the vision after the seals have been opened; and in the midst of the trumpets. We cannot be sure that, where chapter ten is placed, all of the trumpets had yet sounded:

"And I beheld, and heard the voice of one eagle flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice: Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitants of the earth: by reason of the rest of the voices of the three angels, who are yet to sound the trumpet" (Apoc. 8:13).

 

Then chapter nine describes the sounding of the trumpet by two of the last three angels. But it is as though it has not happened yet: They are described in the subsequent chapter; but the narrative really halts, not with the sixth trumpet, but with the eagle's declaration that the three angels are yet to sound the trumpet. In other words, 'here are described the three woes which will happen later'. Another way to describe it is a prophecy within a prophecy: When St. John wrote Apocalypse, it all was for the future; when its fulfillment arrives at the part where the eagle cries 'Woe, woe, woe', he (the eagle) is announcing the last three woes anew for the future from then.

 

Then there are the two timelines represented from the beginning to the end, in two pairings: Chapters 10 and 11 (timeline one); then chapters 12 and 13 (timeline two). Each are the beginning and the end of the 'tribulation epoch'; or to be more precise, the antichrist epoch, as it is not a complete tribulation both ways; the first begins with a 'period of peace' and the victory of the Church followed by the antichrist; the second begins with a kind of false peace and the virtual disappearance of the Church followed by the antichrist.

The actual period of peace (timeline one) is represented by chapter 10. The parallel beginning of the false peace (timeline two) is chapter 12. For the former, it is indicated primarily by the angel's declaration (while holding the open little book), that 'That time shall be no longer', which seems to mean possibly more than one thing (which time ?); but in the end it can only mean what is signified by his stance: with one foot upon the sea and one upon the earth, where the two beasts of chapter 13 should emerge. 

 

This means that, if the 'period of peace' should come first, before the antichrist, it is necessary that the beasts of chapter 13 do not come; it is a necessary consequence, as though it were a zero-sum equation. In fact, the angel's stance is effectively saying, without words, that because those two beasts are prevented, a 'period of peace' has come instead (a bittersweet one).

 

The Seven Thunders, The Nullification Of A Timeline, And A Paradox

 

Before we continue along this line, we must revisit the seven thunders (Apoc. 10:3-4): 'Seven thunders' spoke when the angel "cried with a loud voice, like the roaring of a lion" (Apoc. 10:3~Knox); St. John was about to write their words, but was commanded not to by a voice from Heaven (from whom exactly we do not know) and to 'keep it sealed'. It would seem that these voices might contradict what the angel is saying, that 'that time shall be no longer'. Earlier we speculated that these represented seven Marian apparitions from Rue du Bac to Fatima, as there are seven in total. That is one 'contradiction', where what the angel and the seven thunders say seem to be in conflict. What it really means is that there is a dispute about the timeline: 

The Challoner translation says "seven thunders uttered their voices" while Knox gives it as "the seven thunders of heaven made their voices heard" (Apoc. 10:3). The seven thunders are not necessarily of Heaven, though they may be quoting Heavenly things (related to prophecy). The great monarch had not appeared, nor did the crisis leading to the three days' darkness arrive; thus, these seven thunders may still be speaking of these things although their time will never come; also they may be speaking of the two beasts whom St. Michael is restraining. [*116]

As Apocalypse chapter 10 signifies the beginning of the 'period of peace', then it follows that, even then, some Catholics will be anticipating what might happen at the end of that period. What we do not know is whether, on the other side of all this (during the other timeline, looking as it were across at our own) they would be aware of the two timelines, and thus would know not to expect the two beasts of chapter 13; even as we consider this question, it is important to remember the point is moot, as well as unanswerable.

It does not seem apparent that they would thus be aware of the two timelines. At the least it would not be defined; it is only said that 'that time shall be no longer', and the cry of the angel attempted to deter (or warn against) the utterances of the seven thunders who attempted to prophesy the things of the second timeline, using the Apocalypse itself.

 

This is why, in chapter 11, St. John hastened to explain that, upon the resurrection of the two witnesses, "The second woe is past: and behold the third woe will come quickly" (Apoc. 11:14). As the time of the beast would also be ending ('two and forty months' parallel to the witnesses' 1,260 days), the third woe might be the defeat of the antichrist as St. Paul described in 2 Thess. 2:8. The thing is, the third woe would otherwise be the defeat of antichrist at Armagedon (Apoc. 19), which also fulfills St. Paul's words; but St. Paul's words do not include or preclude Armagedon. This is because there is no Armagedon in the first timeline.

It is possible the movement of the forces of the antichrist which resulted in the holy city being 'tread under foot two and forty months' is the fulfillment of the second woe in the first timeline. 

 

The last three woes do not necessarily follow shortly after the first four, especially in the second timeline. After all, the eagle declared that those angels 'are yet to sound the trumpet' but it is not said anywhere else when the last three angels sound the trumpet (excepting chapter 11, third trumpet only); they are merely described, and then the 'narrative break' of chapter 10.

They probably happen at the end, in the context of the signs of the last days of Matt. 24, Mark 13 and Luke 18. For that is where the third trumpet is sounded (Matt. 24:31). It follows, then, that the previous two woes have come near to it, during the tribulation of those days. [117]

For the narrative of the Apocalypse, then, the last three woes are announced for later, and are described, but their placement in the timeline is not revealed until at least one them is in operation. [**118]

Although the point is moot, as the first timeline is annulled, it cannot be said absolutely that it was never going to happen. It was not intended by Heaven to happen (for otherwise the book of life would never be unsealed), but if it was actually impossible, then positing the existence of two timelines would not be truthful.

If the impression was given that the book was to be unsealed either way, simply by the placement of the subjects in the ordering of the narrative, it was nevertheless not stated explicitly, and then contradicted. That would not be truthful. But equally, the impression was given that it might not be unsealed either way, as St. John was told (by the same angel, St. Michael, who had given him the book) "Thou must prophesy again to many nations, and peoples, and tongues, and kings" (Apoc. 10:11). This necessarily implies that what had gone before is nullified when he had eaten the book (which is his own, the Apocalypse. This is why we did not decide that it was the third secret of Fatima as the 'little book open').

The best solution to this is that if the third secret was revealed, then it means a true pope was reigning at the time; and then he would declare that 'it will not happen' (meaning the third secret; but also meaning the second timeline without knowing it). This would parallel the angel's declaration; each in their own sphere, without conflict.
 

 

We continue with The Last Three Trumpets And Where They Go

The actual period of peace (timeline one) is represented by chapter 10. The parallel beginning of the false peace is chapter 12 (timeline two). For the former, it is indicated primarily by the angel's declaration (while holding the open little book), that "That time shall be no longer", which seems to mean possibly more than one thing (which time ?); but in the end it can only mean what is signified by his stance: with one foot upon the sea and one upon the earth, where the two beasts of chapter 13 emerge.

It is also indicated by the voice from Heaven speaking again, who had already told him not to write the words of the seven thunders, but this time telling him to eat the little open book held by the angel. This signifies that the second timeline is consumed. [*119] The paradox is how can he have consumed his own words when they have not been written yet. And yet, it is the only way to explain how chapter 11 is the alternate timeline which he was to 'prophesy again' while keeping the reference to the second and third woes already spoken of by the eagle in Apoc. 8:13 which had come earlier in the vision, just before chapter 10.

 

For the second timeline, it really has two beginnings: Apocalypse chapters 4 and 12 The first beginning is not with the seals in chapter 6 because it cannot actually begin without the four living creatures (first introduced in chapter 4), although it had begun before the definition of the Assumption. It may be said that chapter 4 is equivalent to 1917, in that as Fatima is where the second timeline (and consequently the Apocalypse) really begins, so also is the future definition of the fourth Marian dogma prefigured or preordained when Eugenio Pacelli (the future Pope Pius XII) was consecrated bishop on May 13, 1917 (the date of the first Fatima apparition) which was defined 33 years later, on Nov. 1, 1950. Thus it was that the four living creatures, in this sense (as of the four Marian dogmas), were present in Heaven from 1917.

The second beginning is in 1958, when the events related in chapter 12 begin to be fulfilled. Those particular visions were seen as 'signs in Heaven' without any apparent connection to previous visions. This second beginning 'confirms' the first, and closes the circle.

It might be wondered what might have happened if this 'circle' (the open loop from 1917 consisting of the four living creatures of chapter 4 until the definition of the Assumption) had not been closed. This is reflected in the 'circular' nature of the arrangement of Apocalypse. But we do not have to wonder very much: Certainly then the angel of chapter 10 would have to declare, 'That time shall be no longer'. But he did not have to say that, nor will he.

What The Prophet Daniel Was Given To See

12:1  But at that time shall Michael rise up, the great prince, who standeth for the children of thy people: and a time shall come such as never was from the time that nations began even until that time. And at that time shall thy people be saved, every one that shall be found written in the book.

K~  Time, then, that Michael should be up and doing; Michael, that high lord who is guardian of thy race. Distress shall then be, such as never was since the world began; and in that hour of distress thy fellow-countrymen shall win deliverance, all whose names are found written when the record lies open. 

("K~" is the Knox translation).

We have seen how the archangel has a pivotal role in whichever way the timeline goes. But these verses will really concern only the second timeline; only that was not known then, nor that there were two of them.

 

 

12:2  And many of those that sleep in the dust of the earth, shall awake: some unto life everlasting, and others unto reproach, to see it always.

K~  Many shall wake, that now lie sleeping in the dust of earth, some to enjoy life everlasting, some to be confronted for ever with their disgrace.

This is the first resurrection (Apoc. 20: 4-6). The key here is many and not all - this is not the Last Judgement.

That some will rise 'unto reproach, to see it always' is not mentioned explicitly in the first resurrection, which only states that "the rest of the dead lived not, till the thousand years were finished" (Apoc. 20:5); but it is unnecessary, as it is already more than implied in Apoc. 13:8 and 17:8. The book of life is unsealed at this point, as we should remember.

Further, it is only stated here that many shall 'awake': Some unto the first resurrection, the others unto reproach - but these last do not necessarily live yet in their reproach. We only know for sure that the beast and the false prophet were "cast alive into the pool of fire, burning with brimstone" (Apoc. 19:20) but of the rest, who were part of the army of the beast, it is only said that they were "slain by the sword of that horseman, the sword that comes from his mouth" (Apoc. 19:21). [119A]

 

12:3  But they that are learned shall shine as the brightness of the firmament: and they that instruct many to justice, as stars for all eternity.
 

K~  Bright shall be the glory of wise counsellors, as the radiance of the sky above starry-bright for ever their glory, who have taught many the right way.

 

The true Church rises again: "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection. In these the second death hath no power power; but they shall be priests of God and of Christ; and shall reign with him a thousand years" (Apoc. 20:6).

Pope Pius XII condemned as heresy the idea that Christ Himself will reign visibly with the elect on earth during this time. We think that the pontificate of Siri which was prorogued in 1958 due to circumstances beyond his control will be taken up at this time. After all, it is the first resurrection. How precisely that is to come about is not yet known. We only know that the 'man-child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod...was taken up to God, and to his throne' and remains there at this time.

 

 

12:4  But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time appointed: many shall pass over, and knowledge shall be manifold.
 

K~  For thyself, Daniel, keep this revelation locked away; sealed up the record of it must be until the hour appointed. Leave others to hasten to and fro, in search of knowledge.✻

(✻ Footnote from Knox: The last part of this verse cannot be rendered with any certainty).

It is to be wondered whether, if the second timeline had not come about, if the 'book' here referred to is the 'little book open' of Apoc. chapter 10. Insomuch as it is second-timeline related (as is almost all of the Apocalypse) it would appear at first to be so; but it cannot be possible as then Daniel's prophecy cannot be fulfilled in that case, if the second timeline is 'annulled'.

If so, verses two and three would be interpreted in a different sense: 'Many' would include everyone who had attained the age of reason, and thus can be judged accordingly; the rest would remain in Limbo for all eternity.

 

As for the last part, 'which cannot be rendered with any certainty', both translations seem to indicate that none shall know the meaning of these words until the time appointed, no matter how many generations search through them. It would (have been) be futile to try, but not forbidden.

12:5  And I Daniel looked, and behold as it were two others stood: one on this side upon the bank of the river, and another on that side, on the other bank of the river.

K~  Thus he spoke; and now, looking up, I saw two others that stood there, one on either bank of the stream.

 

We do not know who these two are, but following everything we have seen up to this point, they might represent someone of either timeline (or at least an angel for each of the two); one on either side of the river, which itself might represent the 'river of water of life' (Apoc. 22:1,17). They do not say anything. At this point, they could say nothing; they are there to signify the timelines and that is all.

It might interpreted as both timelines ultimately ending up at the same place; and they do, but we very much do not think the results will be the same. Again, there had to be a real possibility of a major difference being made, concerning salvation (for God needs nothing from us), or none of this makes any sense. That is to say, the added mysteries would not actually add anything.

 

 

12:6  And I said to the man that was clothed in linen, that stood upon the waters of the river: How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?
 

K~  But he, the man clad in linen, stood there yet over the river itself; and when I asked how long these wondrous doings should last,

 

The man 'that was clothed in linen' is the apparition who began to show Daniel these visions. His appearance resembles the apparition to St. John in Apocalypse chapter one (Dan. 10:5). Like St. John, Daniel was left without strength (Dan. 10:16-18). Daniel described him as one with 'the likeness of a son of man' which is similar to St. John's description. Their resemblance to 'a son of man' bespeaks to their place in Heaven, with the Beatific vision. They may not necessarily be angels, but they necessarily resemble them in this state: "And he measured the wall thereof an hundred forty-four cubits, the measure of a man, which is of an angel" (the measure of the New Jerusalem, Apoc. 21:17). [119B] The visions recorded in Daniel's chapter eleven concern the time of the setting up of the 'abomination unto desolation' before the coming of Christ, which itself prefigures the desolation of the Vatican beginning with the false papacy and its false council. Then the next part of the vision, recorded in Daniel's chapter twelve, concerns the time which also the Apocalypse is concerned with; but not the Gospel accounts, as it is not yet the end. [120]

In verse one the apparition told Daniel that, out of the great tribulation when St. Michael stands up for the people of God, his people shall 'be saved, every one that shall be found written in the book'. So he is speaking of the book of life. Although it is the main subject of Apocalypse, so is the two timelines by which the end may be reached. What is not said (from then until now) is why there are two, and what is the difference between them which concerns the whole history of salvation. So that is why there were two 'witnesses', one on either side of the river, and this one, clothed in linen, 'stood there yet over the river itself' with no indication as to which way is which. That he is concerned with both is obvious.

 

Daniel's question leads to a declaration which is reminiscent of the angel of Apocalypse chapter 10:

12:7  And I heard the man that was clothed in linen, that stood upon the waters of the river: when he had lifted up his right hand, and his left hand to heaven, and had sworn, by him that liveth for ever, that it should be unto a time, and times, and half a time. And when the scattering of the band of the holy people shall be accomplished, all these things shall be finished.

 
K~  it was from him I had my answer. Both hands raised to heaven, he swore by the God who lives for ever that there should be an end to it; it should last for a space of time, and for twice as long, and for half as long, no more. Strength of God’s holy people must be broken utterly; when that is over, all is over and done.✻

(✻ Footnote from Knox: Here too the end of the verse is variously interpreted).

Immediately we may infer that 'the end of the verse is variously interpreted' because it has application to (as then unknown) both timelines:

 

For the first, this declaration strongly correlates to the seventh trumpet and what it means: "But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound the trumpet, the mystery of God shall be finished, as he hath declared by his servants the prophets" (Apoc. 10:7). That was to happen after the 'two and forty months' of the first timeline reign of antichrist. The 'band of the holy people' (those who had kept faithful) are thus scattered. This would also be at the end of time according to the Gospels, which give the details which concern the end of the world whether or not the antichrist is there. But for the first timeline, he is there, and his presence is inferred by the 'scattering of the band of the holy people'. [121]

For the second, the 'scattering of the band of the holy people' is accomplished in Apocalypse chapter 14 which is also the same as the third secret vision of Sr. Lucia (see "Third Secret Martyrdom Vision"). The reign of the antichrist is not ended then, but something else is ended.

If the purpose from the beginning until now is to ensure that the book of life (the main focus of Apocalypse and the unspoken part of the mission of the Church) is unsealed, then it is true that 'when the scattering of the band of the holy people shall be accomplished, all these things shall be finished'.

 

 

To compare this vision with St. John's (the angel of Apocalypse chapter 10 and the 'man clothed in linen'):

The angel was witnessed by the Heavenly vision and St. John.

The man was witnessed by two others (one on each side of the river) and Daniel.

The angel stood upon the the sea and the earth.

The man stood upon the waters of the river.

 

The angel was 'clothed with a cloud', a rainbow on his head, face as the sun, feet as pillars of fire.

The man was clothed in linen.

 

The angel held the 'little book open'.

The man held nothing.

 

The angel lifted his hand up to heaven before his declaration. 

The man lifted up his right hand, and his left hand to heaven before his declaration.

(* For the angel, we do not know which hand was which; which was holding the book, which was lifted to heaven, or whether the hand was holding the book which was lifted to heaven).

 

The angel 'swore by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things which are therein; and the earth, and the things which are in it; and the sea, and the things which are therein, etc'.

The man swore by 'him that liveth for ever, etc'.

The angel: 'That time shall be no longer'.

The man: 'That it should be unto a time, and times, and half a time. And when the scattering of the band of the holy people shall be accomplished, all these things shall be finished'.

 

Clearly there is a relation, but what does it all mean ? We will return to this after the next two verses:

 

12:8  And I heard, and understood not. And I said: O my lord, what shall be after these things? 

 

K~  So I had my answer, but still could not tell the meaning of it; Ay, my Lord, I said, but what shall be the end of it all?

 

Knox translates the meaning, we think, more as 'to what end is all of this leading' ? rather than 'what is at the end of all of this' ? In other words, 'to what purpose' ?

It is loosely the same as what is meant by the Challoner revision.

 

12:9  And he said: Go, Daniel, because the words are shut up, and sealed until the appointed time.

K~  Nay, Daniel, said he, no more of this; needs must that this revelation be shut away and sealed up, till the appointed hour comes;

 

And here it is: The second timeline, which continues with a 'period of peace' lasting for one thousand years - after the antichrist - instead of the world's end shortly thereafter. But this would not be known until St. John's 'Revelation'; and even then, not known really, until 'the appointed time'. But for continuity it is important to trace it from Daniel to St. John to today.

 

It would be inopportune to speak of what happens after the 'scattering of the band of holy people' during Daniel's era as the end of the world was hardly even considered then; it was Our Lord Who spoke of it plainly. So it was impossible to speak of what happens after the 'scattering of the band of the holy people' at so early an epoch. [121A]

 

The existence of the book was nevertheless made known even then but little more was given. The Redeemer Who would by His Merits be able to unseal it (which means He also 'ransomed it' or was able to acquire it) had not yet come into the world. So it was inopportune to add anything more then.

But we know now 'to what end' all of this is leading. The unsealing of the book of life, and the things revealed to St. John at the end of Apocalypse. Also there is, we think, another reason for the additional time given amounting to one thousand years.

 

To return to the comparison from before:

 

The figure in Daniel's vision is not St. Michael, as he speaks of St. Michael as a separate person, and not as though of himself in the third person: "But I will tell thee what is set down in the scripture of truth: and none is my helper in all these things, but Michael your prince" (Dan. 10:21).

Daniel's prophecy speaks of the 'scattering of the band of the holy people' but not of the antichrist; the vision of Apocalypse chapter 10 does not speak of him either, but indirectly references him by the angel's stance, upon the sea and upon the earth, and again indirectly by the announcement of the seventh trumpet, which in St. John's revised prophecy of chapter 11 also signals the defeat of the antichrist.

We have seen how, in the Gospel accounts, the antichrist is not mentioned because he is not necessarily operating right before the end of the world. In the first timeline he is; not so for the second.

 

But as Daniel clearly speaks of what must be the first resurrection and certainly not the last, he must be speaking of the second timeline and not the first.

 

And yet, the man in linen stood 'upon the waters of the river' as if right in the middle; and 'behold as it were two others stood: one on this side upon the bank of the river, and another on that side, on the other bank of the river'. The placement of these other two are very carefully stated, as if to be exact: they are equidistant from the 'man in linen' who was right in the middle, 'upon the waters of the river'. We recall how the angel had very deliberately 'set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot upon the earth' (Apoc. 10:2). This seems to indicate that as carefully and deliberately neither timeline was specified in Daniel's time, so also does the angel very carefully and deliberately select which timeline was not to pass.

 

12:10  Many shall be chosen, and made white, and shall be tried as fire: and the wicked shall deal wickedly, and none of the wicked shall understand, but the learned shall understand.
 

K~  and still there shall be chosen souls a many, that are purged by the fire’s assaying, and still there are sinners that will not leave their sinning. The riddle, for these others, a riddle must remain, but wise counsellors there be that will find the clue to it.

The difference between those who understand and those who will not (because they have taught themselves not to understand) is comparable to St. Paul's warning in his epistle to the Thessalonians. Those who will not love the truth will fail to discern the operation of error for what it is, but will instead be confirmed in their contempt for the truth. By contrast, there are many who rightly suspect that they are being lied to constantly, and this concerns them, because they think the truth important. The difference between these two 'camps' has been growing very deep, so that on the one hand, there are many who believe everything according to the 'official' narrative (the operation of error as the propagation of error through all 'legitimate' office and their officials); and on the other hand there are many who do not believe a word of it (or much of it at least). By this time most people have swung one way or the other and seem fully committed. [122]

 

 

12:11  And from the time when the continual sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination unto desolation shall be set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred ninety days.

 

K~  Of this be sure; after the time when the daily sacrifice is abrogated, and all becomes defilement and desolation, twelve hundred and ninety days must pass.

 

The Knox translation makes clear that it is not 1,290 days to pass in between the taking away of the one and the setting up of the other. It is otherwise possible to read it that way.

 

The 'continual sacrifice' here does not specify whether it is the Mass of St. Pius V conducted by priests of doubtless Apostolicity (ordained by bishops according to the old rites who themselves were consecrated by bishops from Pius XII) or whether it is the John 23 version (1962 missal) conducted by the likes of SSPX, or even the Novus Ordo in Latin. 

 

We think it is not the Mass of St. Pius V conducted by priests of doubtless Apostolicity because they are already removed from the 'new church' and thus the antipope has no authority over them. He might, however, abrogate the Mass of St. Pius V using his seemingly official authority which will further distance the sedevacantist clergy from Rome.

If he does this, he might well also abrogate the 1962 missal of Roncalli (John 23), as this is close to the Mass of St. Pius V, if he is consistent. This would leave only the Novus Ordo remaining in the new church, which seems to fulfill this verse. In short: 'Officially' abrogating the Tridentine and making the Novus Ordo the singular standard throughout the new church, with no exceptions. It might even be a newer form of Novus Ordo, specific to the 'abomination unto desolation' (although, as it has no standards, it does not matter what changes are made). Knox uses the word 'abrogated' which here is more accurate to this scenario then the 'taking away' of the Tridentine by Montini (Paul 6), which did not amount to an 'official' abrogation.

There may be an official televised ceremony at the Vatican to make this official.

At that point, one might expect a 'revolt' to occur, spoken of by St. Paul (2 Thess. 2:3-4). This would be the particular fulfillment of those verses. A more general fulfillment of these verses would be the 'revolt' in the Vatican of 1958 which resulted in the installation of the antipapacy (see also Apoc. 12:4-5, 2 Thess. 2:7), but those only prefigure or are signs of this specific, particular fulfillment. There will not be another, so those verses can retire afterwards, so to speak; and not to continue holding onto them for another, future fulfillment.

 

The revolt, in this case, will be many of the 'traditionalists' who still remain with Rome, of which the Society of St. Pius X is the most well known, and will be the fulfillment (or the beginning thereof) also of this: "And I heard another voice from heaven, saying: Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues" (Apoc. 18:4). The 'revolt' is not necessarily the absolute fulfillment of this verse, as there may yet be stragglers who will follow after some time has passed, so it is not then ready to 'retire'. [123]

12:12  Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh unto a thousand three hundred thirty-five days.

K~  Blessed shall his lot be that waits patiently till thirteen hundred and thirty-five days are over.✻

 

(✻ Footnote from Knox: The figures given in verses 11 and 12, like those given in 8.14, are mysteriously uncoordinated with the ‘time, times and half a time’ which is elsewhere given as the time-unit. Cf. Apoc. 12.6, 14 and 13.5, where the time-unit is consistent).

In "The Siri Thesis: Sede Vacante Or 'Sede Remota' ?" we wrote: "There are precisely 2,600 days inclusive from Siri's suppressed election on Oct. 26, 1958 until the close of Vatican '2' on Dec. 8, 1965, taking into account leap years. This is 45 days over precisely seven years. In Daniel 12:11-12, the time of the 'abomination unto desolation' is given as 1,290 days; but then: 'Blessed is he that waiteth, and so cometh unto a thousand three hundred thirty-five days'. The meaning of this is not known". [124] Also there is an additional 30 days above 1,260 for the 3.5 year period which is the usual length of time given for these periods. As Knox wrote, these are 'mysteriously uncoordinated' with the other time-units.

It is not known what is the reason why some may wait an additional 45 days, or why it might be good to do so. It might have something to do with how it begins. For example, from the time of the sixth seal event until the seventh seal, and then the first four trumpets (which should be referred to in terms of the 'false prophecy fulfilled' - Garabandal - as the 'Warning', the 'Miracle', and the 'Punishment') it is not known when the actual beast of Apocalypse chapter 13 should appear (the 'eighth', following the short reign of the seventh - Apoc. 17:10-11), in the midst of these events.

 

12:13  But go thou thy ways until the time appointed: and thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot unto the end of the days.

K~  And for thyself, Daniel, go thy way … till the end; till the end of the days rest thou shalt, and rise to fulfill thy appointed destiny.✻

(✻ Footnote from Knox: This verse is very obscure, and perhaps corrupt. The latter part of it is usually interpreted as meaning that Daniel will die and rise again to happiness in a future life; but if so all the words in it are used in an unaccustomed sense).

We think he is one of the 'four and twenty ancients' who spoke to St. John in Apocalypse chapter five, assuring him that there is one Who can unseal the book.

He may be elsewhere in Apocalypse as well, as one of a number of unnamed characters, who may or may not have the appearance of an angel. 

The specific 'destiny appointed' to him may lie beyond Apocalypse, however. He did ask 'what lies after all these things' ?

Lastly, it seems he was told not to worry about it: "And thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot unto the end of the days".

---  END OF SESSION  ---

Footnotes / Extended Details

 

 

112.  We have also seen that the 'little book open' of Apocalypse chapter ten can arguably be the third secret of Fatima. That also is not the 'revelation that is locked away' given to Daniel. What does not make sense, in our opinion, is if the sealed book itself contained revelations while the events accompanying the opening of the seals are already described, particularly in chapter six.

In verse four, when Daniel is told to "shut up the words, and seal the book" ("keep this revelation locked away" - Knox), this concerned the first resurrection, which is revealed later by St. John. In verses eight and nine, when Daniel asked "what shall be after these things" ? ("what shall be the end of it all" ? - Knox), this concerned the second timeline period of peace, the 'millennium', and how that ends; and then the 'new heaven and the new earth' of the last two chapters.

112A.  The four living creatures showed St. John the events accompanying the opening of the first four seals, which may be a sign of Our Lady's as yet undefined titles of 'Mediatrix of all Graces' and 'Co-Redemptrix'.

The four Marian dogmas, the Immaculate Conception, Perpetual Virginity, Divine Maternity, and the Assumption all bespoke of Her role in salvation as Mediatrix and Co-Redemptrix, which is how Our Lord came to be on earth, and to be able to open the seals, as He is worthy, being true God and true Man.

Verse six describes "a Lamb standing as it were slain", and "in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the ancients". The Lamb is the basis of salvation for all, in that His Merits extend that far; and is the basis for all the graces for all who are in that scene. We observe the unity of the first three: The Lamb in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures; but then, also, in the midst of the ancients. As the ancients are separated from the first part we wonder if they are not representative of the communion of saints, including those of the Old Law. This would show a continuity between them, especially as, after the Resurrection, He had opened the gates of Heaven at last. As the communion of the saints was still in its infancy during Apostolic times, the ancients might, in the vision, primarily if not exclusively represent the Old Testament figures; but they would represent the communion of saints to come forth during subsequent millennia, until the time came for the seals to be opened.

There can be no way to explain the unity of the first three, separated from the ancients, except as being representative exclusively of the Holy Family, which would place St. Joseph on the throne. He represents the Father; as indeed he did on earth.

The honour paid to him, then, is paid to him first as representative of the Father, similar to how the Pope receives due honour from the Church of which he is the head and the representative of Christ on earth; then honour is his due as head of the Holy Family and spouse of the Mother of God and as the reputed father of Jesus Christ. It appears the Father chose to be represented by St. Joseph in this vision.

 

The thing is, and we are not entirely sure, but in order to remain separate from His Creation God as Father does not appear in the Beatific Vision, or at least in this perspective of the Beatific Vision, except through His Representative.

 

113.  For example, the 'strong angel' Apoc. 5:2 is probably not him.

 

114.  We believe Siri was elected pope in 1958; but as he was forced to resign, the papacy was 'taken out of the way' (see "Siri Thesis: Sede Vacante Or 'Sede Remota' ?"). We do not know exactly how. Can the papacy be thus separated from its electee ? That is the question; and it may have happened. How, we do not know. It might be resolved during the first resurrection (we think there is another possible resolution at the signing of the elect, after the sixth seal; but this is, we believe, a temporary measure. It is Sr. Lucia's Third Secret Martyrdom Vision we are considering in that case). Until then, his papacy is prorogued like the Vatican Council (1869-70), even as that council was illicitly continued - or, rather, replaced - by Vatican '2'; as well seemingly, the papacy also illicitly continued - or, rather, replaced - with Roncalli's, as 'John 23'. For the latter it is believed by some that Siri was allowed to be elected and forced to 'resign' so as to neutralize the papacy, that another cannot be licitly elected and that the pope is kept a prisoner and ineffective. This was probably the intention on the part of the compromised members of the hierarchy, and the devil, except it did not work, as the papacy was 'taken out of the way'. And by 'taken out of the way' it does not mean annulled or cancelled, but, as we have said, prorogued somehow until a later time.

As for how this is possible it might simply have been in the nature of the papal office from the beginning. As an 'undocumented feature'. Except for St. Paul's prognostication and St. John's vision.

 

115.  We think that trying to interrupt the Blessed Virgin's continual intercession at the very moment he had undermined the papacy in Rome is as much of a 'cheat' as trying to trick the entire Church into apostatizing themselves by a technicality, with no choice that no one outside the conclave could have known. Both 'tricks' were part of the same double-undermining manoeuvre; a kind of 'short-circuit', as it were, to damnation. But the devil does not understand that God is just. 

 

So this battle could have happened in 1958. The sequence as given in chapter twelve speaks of the conclave, then the battle of Heaven, then the 'persecution of the Church' with what would become the illicit council and illicit directives from the anti-popes (Apoc. 12:13). The announcement of the council was made in 1959. The devil knows what is in the third secret (after it was written down by Sr. Lucia on Jan. 3, 1944). He might have anticipated causing something to happen in 1960 if the true papacy were not there (or at least eclipsed by the false pope), and if the continual intercession were interrupted.

 

The Double-Technicality: (Of the false papacy and attempting to interrupt Our Lady's continual intercession). After all of the revolutions and weakening of the Faith in the world it was found that the Church still 'technically' functioned. As some have pointed out, the seeds of Vatican '2' have been germinating long before, as a result of the growing modernism all around the Church in the world; but for all that She was still functional. The double-technicality attempt by the devil to defeat the Church must have been based on this reasoning, and as a logical next step after all of the attacks on the Faith which he had been working since the Protestant revolt and then the French Revolution. But in so doing he overstepped, as souls are not to be lost for a technicality, or even two of them.

116.  Earlier we wrote: "Fr. Kramer writes that after the angel's cry, in which there were no words articulated, 'there was a immediate answer'. The seven thunders are designated by the definite article which means that these voices are well-known. We may surmise that St. John knows them. Further on we will speculate on whose voices they might represent". 

St. John was about to write what the seven thunders said, which is why we surmised that he 'knows them' to be Catholic voices, though it is not said where they came from. But 'a voice from Heaven' (we know not whose) told him not to write them. In the end, we conclude that what the seven thunders might have said is essentially the contents of Apocalypse chapters 12-19. That he should write these then would have conflicted with the visions he was later to have. (It is somewhat circular: how could the seven thunders be announcing things St. John has not seen yet in his vision ? But the thing is, if this is true, it only means essentially not to mix the timelines! So what the seven thunders mean is that even as the first timeline is being fulfilled some will be predicting things which belong only to the second).

 

Perhaps the words of these seven thunders also parallel (or are concurrent with) the third secret of Fatima which does not have to repeat the Apocalypse to speak of related things happening at the same time. In fact, it must not, because Fatima does not reference the Apocalypse at all, and thus the book of life also. The only real parallel has been Sr. Lucia's third secret vision and chapter 14 and that, too, is far from obvious. The third secret is, to surmise a bit further, the second timeline with no reference at all to the book of life; or as though the book is still sealed, and will never be unsealed and thus has no effect on the destiny of souls, which is impossible in the second timeline. So the third secret thus really is the worst-case scenario.

So if a true pope would have said that this 'shall not happen' (meaning the third secret which also means the second timeline but without knowing it) that is true; and when false pope Roncalli (John 23) declared, after reading the third secret, that 'this does not concern my pontificate' it is effectively a false pope echoing Apoc. 10:6 which means it is both true and false: It does concern his 'pontificate' (inasmuch as it can be called one) and also it will not happen, that the second timeline would come to pass without the unsealing of the book of life (implied but not said in the third secret, as Our Lady carefully avoided any mention of Apocalypse and thus the book of life). This is an impossibility.

 

As it is a sort of double-negative in reverse we should say it again: When Roncalli said that the third secret 'does not concern his pontificate', it is true that the third secret being fulfilled without reference to the book of life as though it does not exist is a scenario which cannot happen and so yes, it 'did not concern his pontificate' (or any pontificate for that matter). And a true pope would have declared, 'that time shall be no longer'.

It also means that the third secret was never meant to be revealed. That implies the first timeline was never meant to come to pass; but there is nothing actually stated by Heaven that either one cannot be fulfilled. So everything They said is true. This is important, because we expect the antichrist to accuse Them of lying, or the Church, or the witnesses to the Church, or any combination; and to say that Our Lady of Fatima is a false apparition, although we do not know yet what form these accusations will take: "And he opened his mouth unto blasphemies against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven" (Apoc. 13:6). He will probably say he will 'correct' the Church, which has 'defected'. But we digress.

 

It is further complicated by the angel's words when, after the book was devoured, that St. John was to prophesy again 'to many nations, and peoples, and tongues, and kings'. Logically, this should include everything after those very words.

 

But those very words (after chapter 11) are also devoured by St. John, when he has eaten the 'little book open'. Chapter 11 is the 'new prophecy' which is the subject St. John was to 'prophesy again', and is the end-point of what 2,000 years of Catholic prophecy was leading to (as the first timeline), as we have seen.

That has been the essential problem of this problem: It is, in a way, circular.

But this is corrected by Apocalypse chapter 12: Because upon its fulfillment, the events of chapter 10 are fulfilled as not being fulfilled; if it were otherwise, the rest of the Apocalypse is fulfilled (or at least accounted for) with the devouring of the 'little book open'. One timeline precludes the other; but each also confirms the existence of the other. That is how one can be and not be at the same time (like the dilemma of Shrödinger's cat).

In brief: It is all straightforward until chapter 10: Then, 'that time shall be no longer' (everything that came before). This means that the seals are not going to be unsealed (but if they were not, why are the second and third woes announced in chapter 11 ? They should follow the first four trumpets which follow after the seals' opening. That is the dilemma). But the seals cannot be unsealed without the four living creatures representing the four Marian dogmas; if the fourth (the Assumption - 1950) is not defined because a Divine intervention was necessary to save the Church, this means nothing would explain the four living creatures who showed St. John the seals of the Four Horsemen (thus, they cannot then be opened). But the seals were already being opened (Pearl Harbour - 1941). This means that, from that point onward, the second timeline is very definitely decided. Because when Germany attacked Russia first, it meant that the three days' darkness of the first timeline can no longer happen, which would have been the case if Russia had attacked first (and taken all of Europe unprepared). And as the first seal concerns the United States (about going forth to conquer), it is referenced with Pearl Harbour, not Barbarossa.

There is a nine year period in which the first (1941), then the second (1949) seals were opened before the fourth Marian dogma was defined (1950). The third secret was written down for the first time on Jan, 3, 1944. We think the devil did not know what it was until it appeared on paper; the same for the the first two parts, which were written in 1941, in Sr. Lucia's Memoirs. A certain sequence emerges. We cannot say for sure that there is a direct causal relationship between certain events and others. But it seems certain things were decided during that time frame. See about the first four seals and the four horsemen in "Four Living Creatures And The Seals".

Sequence of events: Germany invades Russia first, on June 22, 1941. First two parts of the secret of Fatima are written in 1941 (third and fourth Memoirs of Sr. Lucia, August 31, 1941 and Dec. 8, 1941). The first seal is opened (Pearl Harbour, Dec. 8, 1941 - the day when war was declared, the day after the event). Then the third secret is written down for the first time (Jan. 3, 1944). The 'Trinity' nuclear test occurred on July 16, 1945. The technology was given by spies to the Soviet Union, which then successfully tested it in 1949, which opens the second seal ('...and a great sword was given to him'). Then the dogma of the Assumption is defined in 1950, confirming the four living creatures. Then the third seal is opened in 1957, when the European Common Market was signed into existence. Third secret is transferred to Rome in 1957; Sr. Lucia's last reliable interview, with warnings, to Fr. Fuentes, also 1957. Then the conclave of 1958; the third secret is not revealed in 1960 (which itself is very revealing!); seven years later, the fourth seal is opened on Dec. 8, 1965 when Vatican '2' became official.

We think the devil adjusts his plans according to how the secrets are revealed (hence why it was necessary for them to be secret). For instance, the first two parts of Fatima already began to be fulfilled when the sign of 1938 was seen (the night 'illumined by an unknown light') and when the 'worse war' began 'during the reign of Pius XI', in which Germany had already begun to move even before the invasion of Poland on Sept. 1, 1939. We are assuming that Sr. Lucia never wrote down even the first two parts of the secret until 1941. But Japan had already begun moving even before Germany; in 1937, they attacked China, and "in 1938, the U.S. began to adopt a succession of increasingly-restrictive trade restrictions with Japan". We have always centered the first seal on the United States as the attack on Pearl Harbour fits the per-eight-year sequence of the first four seals; and, in any case, her main foe of the second world war, Japan, had begun her own wars 'during the reign of Pius XI'. It stands to reason that this war would have happened even if the European war did not, as the U.S. embargo and Japan's imperial interests were on a collision course.

Our main question after all this, then, is what effect did the timing of the revelations of the secret of Fatima have on whether Russia attacked Europe first or whether Germany attacked Russia first ? That is where the swing point lies, in preventing the three days' darkness so that the second timeline (and its book of life) can be opened.

 

117.  The second woe may be considered as the army, Gog and Magog, which "came up across the whole breadth of the earth, and beleaguered the encampment of the saints, and the beloved city" (Apoc. 20:8) and was subsequently destroyed (Apoc. 20:9). The third woe, which also is a woe "to the inhabitants of the earth" (Apoc. 8:13) may be the same which is first announced in the first chapter: "Behold, he cometh with the clouds, and every eye shall see him, and they also that pierced him. And all the tribes of the earth shall bewail themselves because of him. Even so. Amen" (Apoc. 1:7); which is either the same in chapter twenty: "And I saw a great white throne, and one sitting upon it, from whose face the earth and heaven fled away, and there was no place found for them" (Apoc. 20:11); or the third woe of Apoc. 11:15 (the first timeline defeat of the antichrist) or the commencement of the final battle of the antichrist (Apoc. 19:11).

In the end, we consider the third woe as not being the end of the world (though that possibility had to be considered), but near to it. It is a 'woe', properly speaking, to the enemies of Christ.

The first woe, then, may signal the end of the period of peace: "And the fifth angel sounded the trumpet, and I saw a star fall from heaven upon the earth, and there was given to him the key of the bottomless pit" (Apoc. 9:1). After the tribulation of the second timeline, the devil is chained in the bottomless pit (Apoc. 20:1). When he is 'loosed out of his prison' (Apoc. 20:7), then begins the 'Woe, woe, woe' of the eagle of chapter eight, who, we should remember, had then (before the period of peace second timeline) said that the last three angels "are yet to sound the trumpet" (Apoc. 8:13).

 

Fr. Kramer's discussion of the first woe is very interesting and certainly would fit with the idea of the devil being 'loosed again' after the period of peace. The locusts are treated as metaphorical and there is no reason they should not be, especially in that context (they may, however, not be metaphorical). As for events of the Apocalypse which are clearly not metaphorical representations of spiritual ideas the description of the sixth seal event is the prime example, as explained in "Last Three Seals In Our Time".

118.  The problem of how the woes can be in the first timeline when the seals are not opened therein again presents itself. We would have to assume the Assumption is defined during the 'period of peace', and then the seals are opened after the period of peace. But if the book of life were to be opened either way, why is Apocalypse arranged like this ?

Perhaps it is like the third secret of Fatima, which treats the second timeline as though there were no book of life, which is impossible (and again, this means the third secret was not intended to be revealed; but its non-revelation is the revelation). The first timeline, chapter 11, seems to indicate that the seals were indeed opened, which lead into the trumpets and final three woes; this would be the case, if not for 'that time shall be no longer' of the angel  of chapter 10 (meaning everything which came before). Chapter 11 is a stand-alone end-times scenario. It begins after the period of peace (with no seals being opened) and ends shortly before the Second Coming (no millennium). They cancel each other out somehow: If the third secret of Fatima was never meant to be revealed, because it represents an impossible scenario, then so also the first timeline end-times was never meant to be fulfilled, because it represents an impossible scenario.

 

By the way it is structured, it can be argued that neither scenario of Apocalypse is possible without contradicting the other somehow; but that is precisely the case. There can only be one; so the other is precluded, whichever is fulfilled. 

 

But the contradiction cannot be resolved before one of the two timelines is selected. Then the alternative seems to be impossible.

 

But the point is one of them was impossible all along (or not meant to be fulfilled all along). Also this cannot be known until it is very late.

 

An 'error' made deliberately is not a lie if it was intended (it was intended to keep the Revelation secret until it was time). No one was told that it was an error; but that is merely an omission. Many things are omitted which it is not necessary for us to know.

 

The Revelation was all revealed; it is all there (including the omission which is there by inference). Including the integrated 'error' (the 'circular' element mentioned in footnote #116) which itself is a part of it. In that sense, it becomes not an error, but a feature. It is part of the secret which was revealed from the beginning. That is called a paradox.

 

So the 'error' is the crossing (or even the collision) of both timelines in the text, through chapters ten and eleven. It is more of a limitation of presenting both at once in parallel although only one can be 'seen' at a time. This is why it cannot be seen accurately until one or the other timeline is selected. This is because, until then, there is not only one to be seen. This is another paradox.

Another way to illustrate this metaphorically (taken from footnote #5 in "Flipping The Script"): "It is in the order of presentation: Of both timelines' respective events, including those which may happen for both (such as the trumpets of chapters 8-9), they cannot be paralleled simultaneously in text; it does not work that way; nor in St. John's vision. We may liken this to 'hardware limitations' of this life and of the intellect, and the difficulty of relating visions as St. John's to text. In other words, such 'hardware limitations' are in fact a feature".

To continue, let us assume there was no second timeline. What would happen then ?

 

The narrative would halt in Apoc. 8:13 with the last three trumpets already described but to happen at some point in the future. Then chapter 12 would begin with no explanation. 

 

But chapter 12 begins if the Divine intervention did not happen. That means the seals were already being opened, which thus enables chapter 12's fulfillment (again, 'circular').

 

If not, then the narrative 'breaks' with chapter 11, and the sequence ends.

 

2,000 years of Catholic prophecy were leading to the Divine intervention as the 'default' timeline. If that did not change, then the Divine intervention would be required, so that chapter 10 is fulfilled: "That time shall be no longer".

 

If it is not required, then the narrative parallels with the seals' opening and chapters 12 and 13. That is when it really begins; otherwise, it is ending with chapters 10-11 following 2,000 years of Catholic prophecy after Revelation ended with St. John's vision.

 

The second timeline, then, really has two endings: The three 'woes' spoken of by the eagle of Apoc. 8:13, which does not happen yet, but holds until the very end; particularly the third woe. In this way the 'trumpets' part of the narrative does not reach chapter 10. Those woes, the last three trumpets, parallel Apoc. 20:7-11, which is the other ending. In a way, the rest of the second timeline is contained within the sequence of the trumpets' soundings.

 

But there is a third ending; or rather, the Gospel parallel ending, where the seventh trumpet and third woe is finally found. It is a 'woe' to the world but not to the faithful. 

 

 

We think there is only one who can engineer this, because though he has the 'mark' of original sin he never sinned; and he is placed highly enough in the hierarchy of Heaven to make it happen. What we mean is this not-entirely-forthright presentation of the timeline(s). It was not meant to deceive us, but meant for the deceiver to deceive himself trying to deceive everyone else. Thus, it was not meant to deceive even the adversary; but in the adversary's attempt to deceive everyone else he caused the second timeline to be enabled.

It was counted on that the adversary would take a certain course. So two timelines were presented: One which is worse than the other for those who are between them. Heaven was not bound to explain which was which; not to the adversary, and not to us, especially as They did not even make known, to us, that there were actually two of them. That was not necessary to know for salvation, although it was revealed anyway.

That is the closest we can arrive at this time to a cogent explanation of how it all happened.

 

But it is important to remember that along the first timeline, Heaven did everything They could to prevent the Divine intervention to become actually necessary, at least until the devil defeated himself in attempting to defeat the Church. We know of no other way to describe it. It is not a case of the members of the Church doing more than is necessary the whole time. No, all of their efforts were required to get to this point, and for the devil to 'overreach'.

 

If it became necessary for the Divine intervention to happen, it is because something even worse would happen if it did not (and there would be no book of life). At the same time, it was preferred that the second timeline be the one fulfilled, as the book of life is for the good of souls.

 

119.  The little book, open, cannot have represented the Fatima secrets since Fatima would not actually be prophesied until 1917. However, being part of the second timeline, Fatima would nonetheless be annulled before it even came to be, in the instance of an earlier necessary Divine intervention. Thus the 'little book open' represents everything after chapter 11, since they are a part of the same vision. It is however a paradoxical loop either way.

To put it in brief: How can a prophecy be annulled before it had been prophesied ? The only way is to announce that there is one, but not to give details until its time had come, or else it is annulled (then the details cannot be given). That is one reason for the secrets. 

The thing is, in Apocalypse, the timeline details are given, so they cannot be represented as annulled before they are given; that is why it is represented by the 'little book open'.

Does this mean, then, that the 'seven thunders' are the words of Fatima ? Not necessarily. We have seen that those thunders might speak of events of the second timeline (chapters 12-19) being prophesied even as the first timeline is being fulfilled during the 'period of peace'. They might also (or otherwise) even be speaking of the seals which were seen earlier in the vision; and thus those details might be repeated in the text if they were part of the seven thunders (it might be prophesied, for instance, that the seals will be opened after the 'period of peace'; this would certainly be in conflict with the timelines, and so the angel appears to forestall them in Apoc. 10:3; or, rather, the voices of the seven thunders appear to contradict the angel, who was showing, by his stance, just what was not going to happen: The second timeline and its two beasts. (We have said this before but it bears repeating every time there is a variation in how this question comes about.)

The words of the angel, 'That time shall be no longer', would certainly echo the words of Pius XII or his successor had the third secret been revealed. Without special revelation, it is unlikely he would speak further about it, and especially about the Apocalypse. He might have to define something in this regard - or will pointedly avoid doing so. But we do not know, and that speculation cannot go further.

In the end, if the angel's words do echo the pope's (or vice-versa, or both simultaneously) in the other timeline, then that accounts for the third secret of Fatima as it would then be revealed; then the 'little book open' being held by the angel at the same time is the Apocalypse (which shall also 'be no longer') in parallel with Fatima; and the 'seven thunders' might be members of the Church speaking of the opening of the seals after the 'period of peace' but this can no longer happen; finally, it could be that those who contradict the angel at that time would become, in time, the new heretics who would fall to antichrist when he did arrive in the first timeline, after the period of peace. And that speculation can go no further.

 

119A.  It is only said that the beast and the false prophet were 'cast alive into the pool of fire, burning with brimstone' (Apoc. 19:20) and the rest were slain. At the end, the devil "was cast into the pool of fire and brimstone" (Apoc. 20:9). The 'brimstone' is omitted in Apoc. 20:14-15 but it is understood that the 'pool of fire' referenced there is the same, which is the second death. So of the first resurrection, those who 'awake' unto life everlasting are remaining on the earth until the end, as is told in Apocalypse chapter 20, but of those who awake 'unto reproach' it is not said for certain whither they go then, but that they will 'see it always' (Dan. 12:2).

Actually Apoc. 20:6 might have told us already: "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection. In these the second death hath no power, etc".

119B.  In discussing the appearance of the apparition of chapter one and the angel of chapter ten in St. John's Apocalypse (Section VII, Apoc. 10:1), we concluded that the appearance of the former had to do with the resurrected state of St. John's apparition; as for Daniel's, who was described, in part, as "...his arms, and all downward even to the feet, like in appearance to glittering brass, etc" (Dan. 10:6) this is neither 'as a flame of fire' (the angel), nor 'like unto fine brass, as in a burning furnace'. Our Lord can appear as though in corporeal form in a glorified state if He so chooses, which would explain Daniel's apparition. Daniel referred to his apparition as 'the likeness of a son of man', but as Our Lord had not been born yet, Daniel would not recognize Him as St. John might; yet St. John did not refer to his apparition as Our Lord but also as 'one like to the Son of man'. Unless St. Joseph time-travelled, then Daniel's was Our Lord and St. John's was St. Joseph.

120.  Daniel prefigures St. John. It is as if they play similar roles. That is one of the reasons why we think he is the ancient (or elder) who spoke to St. John in Apoc. 5:5.

 

121.  The details given in the Gospels do not indicate a specific time period. It only indicates that, from the end of the period of peace (when there begin 'wars and the rumour thereof' as though it is a new thing) until the Parousia the same generation will not have passed. It may be many years; but within that timeframe, in the first timeline, is contained the 'two and forty months' of the antichrist's reign. The elements of these two things, the Gospel accounts of the end and the reign of the antichrist are thus interlaced, in the first timeline scenario, without contradicting each other. In this way the same details are given of a different end, this time without the antichrist, without conflict with either timeline.

 

121A.  The official story, as it were, was that the world would be ending shortly thereafter. To speak of this second timeline, which concerns the book of life directly, would possibly give something away. Nevertheless, the book was spoken of to Daniel, and the two 'witnesses' on either bank of the river also attest to it. So Daniel was not told that there would be, or would not be, a time after 'the scattering of the band of the holy people'; he was told only that he could not be told about it.

122.  The polarization of recent years is not necessarily a firm indicator of how they may react to the antichrist when he arrives (as he will appear to be a 'Godsend' to the world). Some on the 'left' may, for reasons unknown but perhaps for some truth they yet retain, realize who he is and wake up (instead of being 'woke'); some on the 'right' for reasons unknown but perhaps for sins they prefer to retain, may let themselves be seduced. There is no use for predicting who will go which way, because then it is decision time. Although for many, yes, they have already chosen their way in the past. There is no formula for this.

For many it depends on whether they will listen to the sedevacantists or not. At bottom is a simple logical decision: Is the one in Rome true or not, and therefore does one believe him or not ?

123.  Afterwards, it becomes of historical note, as were the prophecies of the Old Testament concerning the coming of the Messiah. As for Apoc. 18:4, it ought to be definitely fulfilled by chapter 14. It may be someone remains to come to the truth right up until the end.

124.  Or it might be 2,601 days inclusive (including Oct. 26, 1958 and Dec. 8, 1965 as a whole). However, we are not revising this as it did not begin with a whole day on Oct. 26, 1958 or end on a whole day on Dec. 8, 1965. We have just found out that Montini (Paul 6) "gave his main closing speech and presided over the final ceremonies of the Second Vatican Council in the morning of December 8, 1965, in Rome". And as we know Siri was elected during the evening of Oct. 26, 1958, the hours added together is probably around thirty but not exceeding thirty-six (which would be a day and a half, which would round up to two). So the time is 2600 days x 24 hours plus a remainder of not exceeding 12 hours, or half a day, which is acceptable to discount as not counting for another day. In other words, exactly 2,600 days, or 45 days exceeding precisely seven years - not including leap years (i.e. 365 x 7).

Including leap years (365 days x 7 + 2 [1960, 1964]) would result in the days adding up to 2,602. However, not if one begins from Roncalli's appearance at about 6:00 P.M. Rome (again, thirty to thirty-six hours for partial days), on Oct. 28, 1958). So, either way it is exactly seven years plus 45 days. There must be something in it (those 45 days mentioned by Daniel); we just do not know what it is.