Who might replace Rowan Williams as Archbishop of Canterbury?

At this point nothing is really very certain, but many sources (Anglican and external) cite John Sentamu (Archbishop of (/"for") York) as the most likely candidate, who is Ugandan by origin (so no, not restricted to "English English", although he is a British Commonwealth citizen).
Re approach - Dr. Williams has been working tirelessly as a conciliatory figure within the Anglican communion, trying to hold various sections together. He is also probably best described as a "moderate", seeking a middle line that is broadly acceptable to most. I don't agree with all of his views, but he has been a reasonable spokesperson.
Dr. Sentamu is not this! He is pretty conservative and non-compromising, with very divisive views (he was one of only 4 bishops who refused to sign the Cambridge Accord, which related to the basic human rights of homosexuals). I actually suspect this will count against him in terms of candidacy, since the wider Anglican Church presumably does not hope to fragment itself internally or publicly. Equally, if elected, I strongly suspect his strong views will be a problem for a large number of the congregation (how to say... the general congregation is notably more moderate than many of the Anglican officials, especially on divisive issues like those Sentamu tends to speek on... perhaps it could be said he speaks for the Church as an office, but not for the congregation).
Alternative candidates I've seen mentioned include Rt Rev Richard Chartres and Rt Rev Nick Baines. My personal suspicion is that Richard Chartres has the most chance of not polarizing things to damaging levels, which may count strongly in his favour. It depends on what the committee (this includes the official process, asked in the question) see as important.
Re eligibility, the above link states:

Are all bishops from within the Anglican Communion eligible for consideration as the next Archbishop of Canterbury?
Since the Archbishop of Canterbury is automatically a member of the House of Lords he must, under the law of the land be a British, Irish or Commonwealth citizen. The person chosen will be someone whom the CNC considers to be best able to fulfil the full range of responsibilities of the role, which, in addition to those concerning the Anglican Communion include being Primate of All England, Metropolitan for the Southern province and Diocesan Bishop of Canterbury. There is, however, no rule which limits the CNC to choosing someone who is currently holding an office in the Church of England. Indeed Archbishop Rowan was serving in another province of the Communion when nominated as Archbishop of Canterbury.
Could the next Archbishop of Canterbury be female if the women bishops legislation passes in July?
The next Archbishop will be male, whatever happens in Synod this July. Even if the legislation secures final approval then there are several further steps that will have to occur before it can come into force. It will be late 2013 or early 2014 before it is possible for women to be appointed as bishops in the Church of England.

So basically: must be male, a Brtish/Irish/Commonwealth citizen, but does not appear to need any specific denomination within the Anglican Communion. It seems that the phrasing of the question is an implicit "and must be a Bishop", but I am not 100% sure (having read the briefing documents, available under "Resources" here) that it wouldn't be possible to promote someone into the diocesan role and thus become Bishop and Archbishop at the same time. That said, even if technically possible, it would seem logistically unlikely.


Was Mary given a glorified or "spiritual body" like the resurrected body of Jesus while on earth?

The dogma of the Assumption means that the Virgin Mary now experiences
  in heaven that union of glorified body and soul which her son enjoys.
  She is no disembodied spirit, but a complete human person, body and
  soul, matter and spirit, reigning with Christ.

  Mary experienced bodily redemption before the rest of the Church.
  Source

From another source:

  Now God has willed that the Blessed Virgin Mary should be exempted
  from this general rule. She, by an entirely unique privilege,
  completely overcame sin by her Immaculate Conception, and as a result,
  she was not subject to the law of remaining in the corruption of the
  grave, and she did not have to wait until the end of time for the
  redemption of her body.
  As he kept you a virgin in childbirth, thus he has kept your body incorrupt in the tomb and has glorified it by his divine act of transferring it from the tomb. Source

So it seems that her body was a normal mortal body but kept incorrupt in the tomb and got glorified during that process at the end of her life.


Is there an explanation for pre-humans from a biblical point of view?

There is the classic question of where Cain's wife came from and who the people he feared would kill him were. One answer to that question is that they were other hominids alive at the time.

Some, like Hugh Ross and his ministry Reasons to Believe (RTB), suggest that God used hominids to prepare the way and help other species adapt and that if he had not done so, homo sapiens would have burst on the scene and wreaked havoc with the ecosystem balance.

Here's a blurb from RTB:

  RTB’s biblical creation model views the hominids found in the fossil
  record as animals created by God’s direct intervention. These
  creatures existed for a time and then went extinct. RTB’s model
  considers the hominids to be remarkable creatures that walked erect
  and possessed some level of limited intelligence and emotional
  capacity. This ability allowed these animals to employ crude tools and
  even adopt some level of “culture” much like baboons, gorillas, and
  chimpanzees. While the RTB creation model posits that the hominids
  were created by God’s divine fiat, they were not spiritual beings made
  in His image. The RTB model reserves this status exclusively for
  modern humans.

  The model treats the hominids as analogous to, but distinct from, the
  great apes. Because of this, the RTB model predicts that anatomical,
  physiological, biochemical, and genetic similarities will exist among
  the hominids and modern humans to varying degrees. But since the
  hominids were not made in God’s image, they are expected to be clearly
  distinct from modern humans, particularly in their cognitive capacity,
  behavior, “technology,” and “culture.”

Their more detailed speculations are in the book Who Was Adam? (I should note I don't buy all of RTB's views about creation, but I'm just reporting what they say.)

Theistic evolutionists typically see God as working in and through the natural world to bring about his desired end, viz. humans who are in his image. Some think God did something new and special with Adam or that Adam crossed some evolutionary threshold that distinguished him from his predecessors, while others think there was no historical Adam at all, often identifying the first eleven chapters of Genesis as mytho-poetic rather than strictly historical. (Biologos.org has readings on both of these views.)

Young Earth Creationists typically see the hominids as not so different from us, or no more different than, say, an Aborigine from New Guinea is from Shaquille O'Neal.


Holy water is water which is blessed. It is used as a reminder of our baptism.

It is blessed with salt using the following formula (although an older formula is available), which also explains the purpose:

  All make the sign of the cross

  Priest: May God who has given us a new birth in Christ by water and the Holy Spirit be with you all.
  Response: And with your spirit.

  P: By this blessing of water, we recall the sacrament of baptism in which by water and the Holy Spirit we were reborn. Everytime we are sprinkled with this water or we use it in making the sign of the cross upon entering the church and in our prayer at home, we give thanks to God for his gifts beyond human telling and we implore his help so that we may live up to the sacrament which we have received by faith.

  Reading from the Gospel according to John (7:37-39)

  Prayer of Blessing

  P: Let us pray. Lord, holy Father, look upon us who were redeemed though your Son and were reborn at the baptismal font and grant that those who would be sprinkled by this water may be renewed in body and mind and may offer you pure service through Christ our Lord together with the Holy Spirit for ever and ever. Amen.

  If salt is added, the priest blesses the salt using the following prayer:

  P: Almighty God, we ask you to bless + this salt as once you blessed the salt scattered over the water by the prophet Elisha1. Wherever this salt and water are sprinkled, drive away the power of evil and protect us always by the presence of your Holy Spirit. Grant this through Christ our Lord. Amen.

  He adds the salt to the water.

  He sprinkles the water over the people as he says:

  P: Let this water call to mind our baptism into Christ, who by his death and resurrection has redeemed us. Amen.

Salt is added because salt is a purifying agent against evil2 (as indicated in the prayer) and it may help to stop the water going off.

1: See II Kings 2, Elisha healing the waters of Jericho.
2: Hence the custom of throwing salt over one's left shoulder, into the face of the devil sitting there.


Here's what St. Thomas Aquinas commentates on Jn. 19:5:

  Thirdly, Christ's exhibition is further described through the words of Pilate, Here is the man! spoken in a sarcastic way, as if one so disgraced would dare to usurp a kingship. Look at the kind of person you are accusing of this! The words of the Psalm (22:6) apply to him: "I am a worm, and no man." And so, if you do hate your king, spare him now because you see him dishonored. "When disgrace increases, let your hatred decrease,"5 as Augustine says.

  5. Tract. in Io., 116, ch. 2, col. 1942; cf. Catena Aurea, 19:1-5.


What is an overview of how different Christian denominations deal with demon possessions?
Many of us have watched the movie The Exorcist which is loosely based on a true American case of possession of an American teenage boy of 14 years old from Missouri in 1949 and who was given the pseudonym Roland Doe in order to protect his identity. The movie The Exorcism of Emily Rose and the German movie Requiem are loosely based on the story of Anneliese Michel.
But where to start?
Let us go above and beyond the question and start with Jewish exorcisms.

There is no instance in the Old Testament of demons being expelled by men. In Tobias 8:3, is the angel who "took the devil and bound him in the desert of upper Egypt"; and the instruction previously given to young Tobias (6:18-19), to roast the fish's heart in the bridal chamber, would seem to have been merely part of the angel's plan for concealing his own identity. But in extra-canonical Jewish literature there are incantations for exorcising demons, examples of which may be seen in Talmud (Schabbath, xiv, 3; Aboda Zara, xii, 2; Sanhedrin, x, 1). These were sometimes inscribed on the interior surface of earthen bowls, a collection of which (estimated to be from the seventh century A.D) is preserved in the Royal Museum in Berlin; and inscriptions from the collection have been published, translated by Wohlstein in the "Zeitschrift für Assyriologie" (December, 1893; April, 1894).
The chief characteristics of these Jewish exorcisms is their naming of names believed to be efficacious, i.e., names of good angels, which are used either alone or in combination with El (=God); indeed reliance on mere names had long before become a superstition with the Jews, and it was considered most important that the appropriate names, which varied for different times and occasions, should be used. Exorcism (Catholicism Encyclopedia)

In Sacred Scriptures, we see Jesus performing exorcisms as part of his Messiahship.

Assuming the reality of demoniac possession, for which the authority of Christ is pledged, it is to be observed that Jesus appealed to His power over demons as one of the recognised signs of Messiahship (Matthew 12:23, 28; Luke 11:20). He cast out demons, He declared, by the finger or spirit of God, not, as His adversaries alleged, by collusion with the prince of demons (Matthew 12:24, 27; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:15, 19); and that He exercised no mere delegated power, but a personal authority that was properly His own, is clear from the direct and imperative way in which He commands the demon to depart (Mark 9:24; cf. 1:25 etc.): "He cast out the spirits with his word, and he healed all that were sick" (Matthew 8:16). Sometimes, as with the daughter of the Canaanean woman, the exorcism took place from a distance (Matthew 15:22 sqq.; Mark 7:25). Sometimes again the spirits expelled were allowed to express their recognition of Jesus as "the Holy One of God" (Mark 1:24) and to complain that He had come to torment them "before the time", i.e the time of their punishment (Matthew 8:29 sqq; Luke 8:28 sqq.). If demoniac possession was generally accompanied by some disease, yet the two were not confounded by Christ, or the Evangelists. In Luke 13:32, for example, the Master Himself expressly distinguishes between the expulsion of evil spirits and the curing of disease.
Christ also empowered the Apostles and Disciples to cast out demons in His name while He Himself was still on earth (Matthew 10:1 and 8; Mark 6:7; Luke 9:1; 10:17), and to believers generally He promised the same power (Mark 16:17). But the efficacy of this delegated power was conditional, as we see from the fact that the Apostles themselves were not always successful in their exorcisms: certain kinds of spirits, as Christ explained, could only be cast out by prayer and fasting (Matthew 17:15, 20; Mark 9:27-28; Luke 9:40). In other words the success of exorcism by Christians, in Christ's name, is subject to the same general conditions on which both the efficacy of prayer and the use of charismatic power depend. Yet conspicuous success was promised (Mark 16:17). St. Paul (Acts 16:18; 19:12), and, no doubt, the other Apostles and Disciples, made use of regularly, as occasion arose, of their exorcising power, and the Church has continued to do so uninterruptedly to the present day. - Exorcism (Catholic Encyclopaedia)

In the Early Church exorcisms were not so formula regulated as in some Christian denominations nowadays.

We have it on the authority of all early writers who refer to the subject at all that in the first centuries not only the clergy, but lay Christians also were able by the power of Christ to deliver demoniacs or energumens, and their success was appealed to by the early Apologists as a strong argument for the Divinity of the Christian religion (Justin Martyr, First Apology 6; Dialogue with Trypho 30 and 85; Minutius Felix, Octavius 27; Origen, Against Celsus I.25; VII.4; VII.67; Tertullian, Apology 22, 23; etc.). As is clear from testimonies referred to, no magical or superstitious means were employed, but in those early centuries, as in later times, a simple and authoritative adjuration addressed to the demon in the name of God, and more especially in the name of Christ crucified, was the usual form of exorcism.
But sometimes in addition to words some symbolic action was employed, such as breathing (insufflatio), or laying of hands on the subject, or making the sign of cross. St. Justin speaks of demons flying from "the touch and breathing of Christians" (Second Apology 6) as from a flame that burns them, adds St. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures 20.3). Origen mentions the laying of hands, and St. Ambrose (Paulinus, Vit. Ambr., n. 28, 43, P.L, XIV, 36, 42), St. Ephraem Syrus (Gregory of Nyssa, De Vit. Ephr., P.G., XLVI, 848) and others used this ceremony in exorcising. The sign of the cross, that briefest and simplest way of expressing one's faith in the Crucified and invoking His Divine power, is extolled by many Fathers for its efficacy against all kinds of demoniac molestation (Lactantius, Divine Institutes IV.27; Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word 47; Basil, In Isai., XI, 249, P.G., XXX, 557, Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures 13.3; Gregory Nazianzen, Carm. Adv. iram, v, 415 sq.; P.G., XXXVII, 842). The Fathers further recommend that the adjuration and accompanying prayers should be couched in the words of Holy Writ (Cyril of Jerusalem, Procatechesis 9; Athanasius, Ad Marcell., n. 33, P.G., XXVII, 45). The present rite of exorcism as given in the Roman Ritual fully agrees with patristic teaching and is a proof of the continuity of Catholic tradition in this matter. - Exorcism (Catholic Encyclopaedia)
The practice of exorcism was not confined to clerics in the early ages, as is clear from Tertullian (Apology 23; cf. On Idolatry 11) and Origen (Against Celsus VII.4). The latter expressly states that even the simplest and rudest of the faithful sometimes cast out demons, by a mere prayer or adjuration (Mark 15:17), and urges the fact as a proof of the power of Christ's grace, and the inability of demons to resist it. In the Eastern Church, a specially ordained order of exorcists (or of acolytes, or door-keepers) has never been established but in the Western Church, these three minor orders with that of lectors as a fourth) were instituted shortly before the middle of the third century. Pope Cornelius (261-252) mentions in his letter to Fabius that there were then in the Roman Church forty-two acolytes, and fifty-two exorcists, readers, and door-keepers (Eusebius, Church History VI.43), and the institution of these orders, and the organization of their functions, seems to have been the work of Cornelius's predecessor, Pope Fabian (236-251). Exorcist (Catholic Encyclopaedia)

Catholic exorcisms within the Church in modern days generally use the Rite of Exorcisms, which most are aware of. Once and awhile Holy individuals will have an inspiration that will have the same intended outcome.
For example, here is a story about Fr. Dolindo Ruotolo

His goodness made even Hell tremble. As demons subdued to Jesus and publicly declared that He was the Son of God; as Father Pio from Pietralcina in his fight against Satan succeeded in defeating the devil with the wounds of Christ; also Don Dolindo in the Name of Jesus, when doing exorcisms, thrust out demons who cursed him, from the bodies of the possessed.
Demons are known to obey only those who work by the hand of God.
One day when a very resistant demon made fun of Father Dolindo, refusing to leave the man he possessed, Father Dolindo grasped a rope and began to flagellate himself and his penitence and suffering as consequence inflicted such a suffering on the demon to force him to abandon his victim, leaving him finally free.

St. Francis de Sales had a unique perspective on exorcisms to say the least!

In the life of St. Francis de Sales we read that the saint exorcised heretics before preaching to them, because he said all heretics are to some extent dominated by the devil, who is after all the Father of Lies. The saint’s way of acting was most successful. Seventy-two thousand heretics were converted.
“Francis already knew the country through which he was to pass. For while he was at school in the college at Annecy, M. de Boisy had been obliged to leave the chateau of Sales and to stay for some time at Brens in Chablais. Consequently, during the holidays at this period, Francis had become acquainted with the neighborhood, and his knowledge now
served him in good stead.
“As soon as the travellers had crossed the stream of the Chandouze, which, separating the commune of Juvigny from that of St. Cergues, formed in those days the boundary of Chablais, they made a halt for the purpose of prayer. They first of all saluted the angel guardian of the province; then, turning their thoughts to the God of all, they begged him to drive forth from the land the evil spirits which held the inhabitants chained in heresy, and to bless with success the work to which his servants were about to devote themselves.
“Charles Auguste tells us that the Provost and his companions made a custom of reciting within themselves a similar exorcism every time that they were called upon to dispute with the Calvinists, and especially in the case of the ministers; for Francis used to say that all heretics, but especially those who preach and instruct, are possessed or obsessed by the devil, and that for this reason it is a good thing to exorcise them before proceeding to a disputation.”! -"A Notebook on the Devil and Exorcism"

Deliverance ministries are practiced by some denominations like in Anglicanism (Church of England) and even Fr. Gabriele Amorth acknowledges the effectiveness of these types of exorcisms in certain occasions.

In Christianity, deliverance ministry refers to groups that perform practices and rituals to cleanse people of demons and evil spirits. This is done in order to address problems manifesting in their life as a result of demonic presences, which have authority to oppress the person. Believers attribute people's physical, psychological, spiritual, and emotional problems to the activities of these evil spirits in their lives. Deliverance rituals are meant to cast out evil spirits, helping people overcome negative behaviors, feelings, and experiences. Each individual event is different, but many include some or all of these major steps: diagnosis, naming the demon, expulsion, and some form of action taken by the exorcised person after their exorcism to keep the demon from returning. Exorcisms may be performed by individuals or by churches or ministries; in casting out spirits, adherents believe they are following the example of Jesus Christ and his disciples given in the New Testament. The doctrines and practices of these ministries are not accepted by all Christians.
Expulsion
The method used to expel demonic presences varies. Some adherents recite Biblical stories about casting out demons, or pray; many also invoke "the blood of Jesus," a reference to Jesus suffering for people's sins and intervening with God on behalf of humanity. In this context, invoking the blood of Jesus is a call for Jesus to intervene specifically on behalf of the possessed individual. The person performing the deliverance might touch the possessed person, or anoint them with oil or water. People may also perform rituals over objects that contain evil spirits, destroy them by breaking or burning them, then remove them from the home. If a place has evil spirits because of sins that were committed there in the past, people may repent on behalf of those who committed the sins as part of the process of casting out the evil spirits. All of these actions are meant to force a demon to leave an afflicted person, place, or thing. The demon may resist the expulsion using the body of the possessed person, and may speak, scream, cry, laugh, vomit, or lash out physically. For this reason, exorcism or deliverance rituals can be loud, dramatic, highly emotional experiences for those involved. Once the demon is gone, people often describe feeling as though weight or darkness has left them. - Deliverance ministry (Wikipedia)

Baptists, like Albert Mohler, the ninth president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, states that Baptists, among other evangelical Christians, do:

believe in the existence, malevolence, and power of the Devil and demons. About these things, the New Testament is abundantly clear. We must resist any effort to 'demythologize' the New Testament in order to deny the existence of these evil forces and beings. At the same time, we must recognize quickly that the Devil and demons are not accorded the powers often ascribed to them in popular piety. The Devil is indeed a threat, as Peter made clear when he warned: 'Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.' [1 Peter 5:8] The New Testament is also clear that very real cases of demonic possession were encountered by Jesus and his followers. Jesus liberated afflicted individuals as he commanded the demons to flee, and they obeyed him. Likewise, the Apostle Paul performed exorcisms as he confronted the powers of evil and darkness in his ministry. A closer look at the crucial passages involved reveals no rite of exorcism, however, just the name of Jesus and the proclamation of the Gospel. Likewise, there is no notion of a priestly ministry of ordained exorcists in the New Testament. - Mohler, Albert (15 November 2010). "On Exorcism and Exorcists: An Evangelical View". Southern Baptist Convention.

Eastern Orthodoxy

In the Eastern Orthodox Church, demonic activity is inextricably associated with disease and blight. As a result, exorcisms are quite common, even finding their way in rituals involving the blessing of fields. The exorcism ritual, found in the Euchologion, is that of St. Basil the Great. The baptism liturgy in Eastern Orthodoxy also contains an exorcism ritual.

Lutheranism

The Lutheran Church traces the practice of exorcism to the Scriptural claim that Jesus Christ expelled demons with a simple command (Mark 1:23–26; 9:14–29; Luke 11:14–26). The apostles continued the practice with the power and in the name of Jesus (Matthew 10:1; Acts 19:11–16). Contrary to some denominations of Christianity, Lutheranism affirms that the individual, both the believer and the non-believer, can be plagued by demons, based on several arguments, including the one that "just as a believer, whom Jesus Christ has delivered from sin (Romans 6:18), can still be bound by sin in his life, so he can still be bound by a demon in his life."
After the Protestant Reformation, Martin Luther abbreviated the Roman ritual used for exorcism. In 1526, the ritual was further abbreviated and the exsufflation was omitted. This form of the Lutheran Ritual for Exorcism was incorporated into the majority of the Lutheran service-books and implemented. According to a Pastoral Handbook of the Lutheran Church,

In general, satanic possession is nothing other than an action of the devil by which, from God's permission, men are urged to sin, and he occupies their bodies, in order that they might lose eternal salvation. Thus bodily possession is an action by which the devil, from divine permission, possesses both pious and impious men in such a way that he inhabits their bodies not only according to activity, but also according to essence, and torments them, either for the punishment or for the discipline and testing of men, and for the glory of divine justice, mercy, power, and wisdom.

The Pastoral Handbook then states:

Let ardent prayers be poured forth to God, not only by the ministers of the Church, but also by the whole Church. Let these prayers be conditioned, if the liberation should happen for God's glory and the salvation of the possessed person, for this is an evil of the body.

With the prayers let fasting be joined, see Matthew 17:21.

Alms by friends of the possessed person, Tobit 12:8-9.

Let the confession of the Christian faith be once required of Him, let him be taught concerning the works of the devil destroyed by Christ, let him be sent back faithfully to this Destroyer of Satan, Jesus Christ, let an exhortation be set up to faith in Christ, to prayers, to penitence.

An interesting note: The “favourite non-Catholic exorcist” of Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio ((now Pope Francis) was reportedly to be a Lutheran pastor in Argentina.  When the Pope was a cardinal in Argentina, his home country, he would call on Pastor Manuel Acuña of Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in Buenos Aires to do exorcisms when the local bishops would not give permission for the Catholic rite. See:The Lutheran Approach to Exorcism

Martin Luther throwing an inkwell at the devil, at Wartburg Castle
Pentecostalism

In the Pentecostal Church, Charismatic Movement, and other the less formalized sections of Christianity, the exorcism ritual can take many forms and belief structures. The most common of these is the deliverance ceremony. Deliverance differs from the exorcism ceremony in that the Devil may have gotten a foothold into a person's life rather than gaining complete control . If complete control has been gained, a full-fledged exorcism is necessary. However, a "spirit-filled Christian" cannot be possessed, based on their beliefs. Within this belief structure, the reasons for the devil to get a foothold are usually explained to be some sort of deviation from theological doctrine or because of pre-conversion activities (like dealing with the occult).
The traditional method for determining if a person needs a deliverance is done by having someone present who has the gift of discerning of spirits. This is a gift of the Holy Spirit from 1 Corinthians 12 that allows a person to "sense" in some way an evil presence. While the initial diagnosis is usually uncontested by the congregation, when many people are endowed with this gift in a single congregation, results may vary.


How did John the Baptist or Jesus fulfill Malachi 3:3?

Mark quotes this passage in the first two verses of his book and it is clear that the 'beginning of the gospel' is the ministry of John. Mark also quotes from Isaiah in confirmation of this.

Thus if the 'messenger of preparation' - spoken of by Malachi - is John the Baptist, then the 'Messenger of the Covenant' (which Malachi says is the Lord himself) is evidently Jesus - God manifest in flesh.

Then the events prophesied by Malachi must be subsequent, not just to the incarnation of the Christ, but subsequent to the ministry of the 'messenger of preparation' (the messenger who precedes the Lord's ministry).

This, therefore, places the events of purifying and offering after the ministry of John the Baptist. Ergo, the events take place during the ministry of Jesus Christ, the Messenger of the Covenant.

So the events must be the fulfillment of what the Levitical priesthood stood for - because, as the question makes clear, the coming of the Christ would end all need for simulated sacrifices on earth.

Therefore the 'offering in righteousness' made by the sons of Levi (the generation following the Levitical priesthood) must be the offerings made, in faith and in love, by those born from above, filled with the Holy Spirit, worshipping the Father in spirit and in truth.

This is evidently a prophecy of the New Testament, a prophecy of a new birth, a prophecy of all that is fulfilled in the sufferings and death of Christ which brings in a worshipping company, offering praises and prayers, through Jesus Christ unto God, the Father.


Minor clarification. While the Temple of Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD, the city of Jerusalem retained its general street plan until 135 AD.  In 135 AD, after the Bar Jakova Revolt, the already damaged city was razed to the ground. In its place, a Greek city called Aelia Capitolina was put in its place.

As such, when Constantine's mother, Helena visited the city in the 300s, there was nothing left, except new settlements which bore no relation to the extant city. This why Golgotha, for example - the outskirts of the town in the day - are, if you believe Helena, now inside the Church of the Holy Sepelchure, smack dab in the center of the city.

Indeed, the city itself has migrated over time. The "City of David," extends south of the current city walls. That one would now exit the "Dung Gate" to go to where David's palace was shows how fluid city layouts can be.

The Temple, which was at the northern end of the city, is now central to it.  The "beautiful gate" (or the "Golden Gate", next to the Temple) was sealed off in 1541, and most of the existing walls date to the Ottomans, built in the 1500s.

As such, if there ever was an "eye of the Needle" gate, (which in my mind is highly doubtful) it certainly no longer exists today. Additionally, any understanding of where the gate was in relationship to the city would be of no use, because there is no context for it.

Update

The Damascus Gate has been the historic main entrance to the city. The actual edifice, however dates to 1547, and was built on the ruins of a 2nd Century AD gate,


Why did the Apostles not go with the rest of the believers outside of Jerusalem?

John Calvin starts by reminding us that Jesus commanded them to begin at Jerusalem (Acts 1:4,8), and says that it makes sense that they would stay there until "being brought into some other place by his hand":

  But here may a question be asked, forasmuch as they were commanded to preach the gospel throughout the whole world, (Mark 16:16) why they stayed at Jerusalem, even when they were expelled thence with force and hand? I answer, that seeing Christ had commanded them to begin at Jerusalem, they employed themselves there until such time as being brought into some other place by his hand, they might know, for a surety, that he was their guide.

Calvin goes on to argue that it was utterly an act of faith to remain there steadfastly in the midst of danger, and that it would be an act of unbelief to flee just because of tribulation:

  Therefore, seeing they see the gospel so mightily resisted at Jerusalem, they dare go to no other place until such time as they have broken that first huge heap of straits. Assuredly, they provide neither for their ease, nor yet for their own commodities either for being void of care by staying at Jerusalem; for they have a painful charge, they are continually amidst divers dangers they encounter with great troubles. Wherefore, undoubtedly, they are purposed to do their duty; and especially, whereas they stand to it when all the rest fly, that is an evident testimony of valiant constancy. If any man object that they might have divided the provinces amongst them, that they might not all have been occupied in one place, I answer, that Jerusalem alone had business enough for them all.

Note that last sentence, "Jerusalem alone had business enough for them all." It's not as though they built summer homes in Jerusalem -- they were ministering to the lost there, just as they would if they were based in Rome or Ephesus. In particular, they were ministering to the poor, and Paul was "eager" to help them do so (Galatians 2:10; Romans 15:25-26).

G. W. H. Lampe argues that in Luke's theology, as ministers of the new covenant the apostles ought to remain in the capital of Israel:

  Luke simply believes that the apostles must stay in Jerusalem, for now that the Jewish
  hierarchy has remained impenitent, they are the true leaders of Israel. Just as the high priest sent out Saul with an anti-missionary commission to Damascus, so the apostles now direct and control the Christian enterprise from their own capital, Jerusalem, either personally or by sending envoys.

Like Calvin, he also argues that the apostles should remain there "until" Jesus led them out, namely by toppling Jerusalem:

  Luke may have shared the idea of Eusebius (historia ecclesiastica, 3.7.8) that the apostles remained in Jerusalem until the impenitence of the Jews was finally punished by the war with Rome.

Earlier in the same work, Lampe notes that the churches throughout the world were subject to "supervision" by the church of Jerusalem:

  In the beginning the Christian Church is the church of Jerusalem. Later the Church spreads through the world outside Jerusalem, but always, because of its nature as the authentic and renewed Israel, this expansion takes the form of an extension of the Jerusalem church. This does not mean that Luke believes that the mission was everywhere directly organized and pioneered by Jerusalem. On the contrary, Luke makes it perfectly clear that he realizes that he has omitted to tell us about the foundation and early history of churches in many parts of the world, including Rome itself; and there is no reason to think that he believed them all to owe their origin to the direct initiative of Jerusalem. He does, however, hold that these churches all came in due course under the supervision and guidance of the church of Jerusalem.

We see this "supervision" at work when the Jerusalem church sends Peter(!) and John(!) to Samaria (Acts 8:14) and Barnabas to Antioch (Acts 11:22), and when the apostles tell Paul that he should go to the Gentiles and they to the Jews (Galatians 2:9). It's also striking that, though it was Antioch where the controversy originally took place, the actual ruling on the Gentile controversy comes from Jerusalem (Acts 15).


What is the historical reason the King James Version was created?

Since one of the reasons for the English Reformation by King Henry VIII which lead to the creation of the Church of England was divorce, I doubt King James I would have needed a new translation.

From Wikipedia, it sounds like the main reasons for the commissioning of the KJV 70 years after the reformation were around translation errors believed to be in the existing English translations.

  The newly crowned King James convened the Hampton Court Conference in
  1604. That gathering proposed a new English version in response to the
  perceived problems of earlier translations as detected by the Puritan
  faction of the Church of England.

It sounds to me like what you had heard may have just been history getting crossed.


What is the Biblical backing for the perspective that our actions affect who makes it to heaven?

A key Bible passage some Christians use for teaching that believers have at least SOME responsibility to bear witness to the truth in Christ is Ezekiel, chapter 3:

  16 At the end of seven days the word of the Lord came to me: 17 “Son of man, I have appointed you a watchman 23  for the house of Israel. [The literal role of a watchman is described in 2 Sam 18:24; 2 Kgs 9:17].Whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you must give them a warning from me. 3:18 When I say to the wicked, “You will certainly die,” 24  and you do not warn him – you do not speak out to warn the wicked to turn from his wicked deed and wicked lifestyle so that he may live – that wicked person will die for his iniquity, 25  but I will hold you accountable for his death. 26  3:19 But as for you, if you warn the wicked and he does not turn from his wicked deed and from his wicked lifestyle, he will die for his iniquity but you will have saved your own life.

  3:20 “When a righteous person turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I set an obstacle 28  before him, he will die. If you have not warned him, he will die for his sin. The righteous deeds he performed will not be considered, but I will hold you accountable for his death. 3:21 However, if you warn the righteous person not to sin, and he 29  does not sin, he will certainly live because he was warned, and you will have saved your own life.”

If we miss the metaphorical import of this passage, we may be in danger of becoming neurotic in our attitude toward unbelievers and BELIEVERS alike ("This viewpoint has periodically reduced me to a nervous wreck"--your words).

As a watchman for Israel, Ezekiel was accountable to warn both the unrighteous and the righteous--unbelievers and believers alike. For Ezekiel to shirk his duty as God's mouthpiece (which is what a prophet is, in essence) would be to fall down on the job to which God called him.

Ezekiel did not fall down on the job, however. He was faithful in warning the unrighteous and righteous of the punishment which awaited them if they never initially repented of their sin or if they had repented at one time but "backslid" into their old way of life.

The application of this passage to Christians today is pretty clear: We, too, are watchmen and watchwomen. We have been saved from wrath through Christ and his cross-death. Out of gratitude for God's gracious and loving salvation, we are to be Christ's witnesses in the world (a witness is analogous to being a watchman who warns people of approaching danger).

  Jesus:  ". . . but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth" (Acts 1:8 NAS ).

Does this mean that we as Christ's witnesses should go around in a continual state of anxiety if we fail to witness to every person with whom we come in contact? Of course not.

  "Have no anxiety about anything, but in everything with prayer and supplication with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God which is beyond human understanding will be like a garrison of soldiers, keeping your heart and mind in Christ Jesus" (Philippians 4:6-7, rhetorician's version).

We Christians are witnesses, to be sure. We are also ambassadors for Christ (see 2 Corinthians 5:20). When we think of witnesses today, we automatically think of witnesses in a court of law. Witnesses are to "tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help them God." Outside the context of a court of law, however, there is another way of witnessing to the truth, and that is by living a life which is worthy of Christ, being light and salt in a corrupt and dark world, shining forth as lights (see Philippians 2:15).

Going back to Ezekiel, we see that Zeke was responsible to warn both unbelievers and believers alike. The same is true of us. The way to go about doing so is by witnessing by both life and lip, but leading with our life. A saying I grew up with, which I learned probably from a Roy Rogers(!) song (Rogers was a television- and movie star in Westerns, mostly, who was also an outspoken Christian), and the song was probably based on the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson:

  "What you are speaks so loud, that the world can't hear what you say!"

Does this mean we don't have to open our mouths and bear witness to the truth as we've found it in Jesus? No, but it's not a matter of either/or, but both/and. We are to live exemplary lives--even if it means suffering for righteousness' sake, and we are also to open our mouths and tell people of what we have found to be true. The truth, of course, is contained in the Bible. John 3:16 is as good a place to start as any, I suppose.

Too often, some Christians are so eager to "share" their faith that they lose all perspective and make a mess of being Christ's witnesses. They witness out of guilt. They witness without love, tact, and gentleness. They witness without sensitivity to the Spirit and to the needs, questions, and hang-ups of the people to whom they witness. They mean well, but they are poor ambassadors who perhaps do more harm than good! They need to take to heart 1 Peter 3:14-17:

  For who is going to harm you if you are devoted to what is good? 14 But in fact, if you happen to suffer for doing what is right, you are blessed. But do not be terrified of them or be shaken. 15 But set Christ apart as Lord in your hearts and always be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks about the hope you possess. 16 Yet do it with courtesy and respect, keeping a good conscience, so that those who slander your good conduct in Christ may be put to shame when they accuse you. 17 For it is better to suffer for doing good, if God wills it, than for doing evil [my italics].

Notice how Peter tells us to be "ready to give an answer." That means we are to wait until people question us, and not vice versa. When they ask us about why we seem to be at peace, why we live by a higher standard than many people, why we seem to care about people, and so on, we then are free to "give an answer" to them. Giving an answer, by the way, means literally "to make a defense," which of course is the art of apologetics. That, however, is a subject for a different question!

In conclusion, I think we need to take a cue from our Lord's approach to people, in that very frequently he asked leading questions and comments--you know, the open-ended kind  which need to be answered with more than just a yes or no (see John 3 and 4, in his interaction with Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman at Jacob's well). That approach, especially when it is preceded by prayerful dependence on the Lord to give us the right words and attitudes, goes a long way toward fulfilling our obligation as "watchmen" for God.


Why does Calvinism need the doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints if it believes in Unconditional Election?

When the five points of Calvinism are looked at as distinct entities, then there does seem to be a bit of redundancy in there.   Part of the reason, though, for that is that the five points are emphasizing bullet-point highlights of a comprehensive theology, and they were done so as a retort to the five points of Arminianism, which follows:

Five Articles of Remonstrance (summarized)

  God has elected to save any person who responds to his grace.
  God's saving grace is offered freely to all, but is only sufficient for those who respond.
  All humans are sinful and incapable of being righteous. However, God has provided grace to enable them to respond to him.
  God's grace enables all good works, but human beings have the capacity to resist God and choose evil.
  God's grace and the power of the Holy Spirit enable believers to overcome sin if they are willing to persevere.

As it's presented in a fashion that aims to address specific issues, its presentation is naturally going to appeal to certain "common themes" while framing the underlying theology with certain key points in primary focus.  The perserverence of the saints specifically counters the fifth point of Arminianism.

Calvinism contends that because the saints are neccessarily new creatures (see Total Depravity/Total Inability), who have been elected solely according to God's will and not their own worthiness (see: unconditional election), and saved definitively by the shed blood the Christ (see: Particular/Limited Atonement) and effectively through the regeneration of the Holy Spirit (see : Irrisistible Grace), then those saints will necessarily, perservere to the end of their lives.

So, you're right, on first pass it does kind of seem redundant or unnecessary, but it's more of an extension of the preceeding points, and it specifically addresses a contrasting view.


What assures Christians that they alone are saved?

First question to ask is what are Christians being saved from or for? Thankfully someone has saved me time from having to write that answer up (Thanks @Caleb):

What does it mean to "be saved"

Again, I would promote the necessity of relationship with God so that a follower knows the nature of God well enough to know what His desire for us. This is summed up in the famous and oft quoted verse John 3:16:

  16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His [a]only begotten Son,
  that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

Caleb answered what we are saved from, my last quote tells us that God does not want to lose any of us, my next part will explain the part that causes us to be in the firing line of Gods wrath.....

Rom 3:23

  23 for all [a]have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

This means we have missed the mark, we have FAILED the test, the Law we have broken. When the Law is broken justice is required. God is a just God so cannot simply ignore that we have sinned and grant mercy, otherwise He is not just. We, as humans cannot remove the need for justice, just as we cannot remove the stain of sin, any attempt to do so is futile:

Isaiah 64:6:

  6 For all of us have become like one who is unclean, And all our
  righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; And all of us wither like a
  leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

We cannot base our idea of righteousness as the grading system that God will use, for His standards are far higher than ours.

How do you ascertain the standard of God? Would Mother Teresa make it based purely upon the standard she demonstrated? Would Hitler based upon his actions meet the requirements of Gods standards? No, surely not in the case of Hitler, but also Mother Teresa, as amazing as she was, also fell short of the requirements that would make her salvation possible.

Long story short, man cannot do anything in his own works to gain salvation. Justice IS required by and sought by God: Psalm 94

So, hopefully I have established from a Christian perspective why we are in the firing line of Gods wrath. Now to be sure of salvation in Christ as a Christian:

So, as Christians believe that it is through Christ that salvation is made possible, because our sinful ways and the requirement for justice made outside intervention a necessity, because mere man was unable to undertake this correction for themselves. Jesus was able to satisfy the demand for justice so that all that was required was for the mercy and grace of God to have a chance to win back from Satan the hearts of man.

To be sure of their salvation a Christian needs to have a relationship with God because then you are learning of His nature such as God cannot lie:

Titus 1:2

  2 in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised
  [b]long ages ago,

He loves us: John 3:16

If then, Christians agree that Paul's words are divinely inspired scripture (and remember God cannot lie) then it is plain and simple for Christians to be certain of their salvation:

Romans 10:9-10

  9 [a]that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in
  your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10
  for with the heart a person believes, [b]resulting in righteousness,
  and with the mouth he confesses, [c]resulting in salvation.

Furthermore, a Christian believes they are being saved so they can live, but they can only live if they do not lead their live according to the flesh, but by the Spirit.

Romans 8:13

  13 for if you are living according to the flesh, you [a]must die; but
  if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you
  will live.

A Christian knows if they are living by the flesh because they act according to their own desire, pursuing their own agenda, but ultimately not seeking to know God more and more.

So, as a Christian, to be sure of your salvation; do not simply live to an acceptable level (i.e., the Law or to mans standards), but rather live by the Spirit.


Mark 10:29-30 vs Matthew 19:28-29: when will we receive our reward?

I don't see Matthew as referring exclusively to the next life. Why do you think that is what it is saying?

In fact, Matthew doesn't give a time frame, therefore, it is less exact, but not contradicting Mark. They are both saying the same thing. Even in other translations, I see it as reading into the text of Matthew to say that it is referring exclusively to the next life. The text of Matthew merely says that those things will be given one hundred fold, and the text of Mark says this as well, but clarifies that it will be given now, and eternal life will be in the next life.


Are there any alternative / emergent views on John 10:22-ff?

I believe this generally refers to the purposes of God the Father and God the Son (Jesus). Jesus was sent to do the will of the Father, so in their purpose they are one. This is similar to the reference in John 17:21.

  "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee,
  that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou
  hast sent me."

The intent is not to describe Himself as the same Being as God, but to demonstrate unity in purpose. Similar statements might be a general saying "Let us fight as one!" or a president saying "The country must come together as one." Neither infer to coming together into one physical mass, but to be unified in desire, effort, and purpose.


Why did Satan tempt Jesus in the desert?

The recorded three temptations of Christ mirror the steps Satan used to bring sin into the world in the first place:

  If you are the Son of God ...

vs Genesis 3

  Did God actually say ...

Also, like with the first sin, it is related to food.

Second:

  If you are the Son of God, jump off ...

vs

  You will not surely die

God didn't mean what He said ("I even quoted a passage to prove it!")

And lastly:

  if you will worship me ...

vs

  you will be like God ...

Questioning God's authority.

Satan is questioning whether Jesus was who He said He was (and whom His Father had just attested to at the baptism) - He was trying to get Jesus to fail in His earthly life so He couldn't be our perfect sacrificial substitute.


What is going on in Matthew 21 and Mark 12?

The answer to the question is obvious; asking it is rhetorical: of course the owner will seek retribution for the wrong done to him and his son by those he trusted.

The purpose of the story - regardless of who fills in this answer - is made clear by the quote from Psalms that follows, and so it is explained (Matt, Mark) that his audience sees immediately that he was comparing them to the caretakers. By asking the question before driving the point home, He allowed them to condemn themselves.

Note that in Matthew, this was the second of two back-to-back parables in which He chides them for failing to do the job His father had entrusted them with, both employing the same tactic of asking a question intended to draw the condemnation from the lips of those being condemned by the comparison.


If God is beyond our comprehension how can we comprehend what he wants?

If by "comprehension" you mean "completely understanding God," then, yes, God is not comprehensible. But if by "comprehension" you mean "knowing God," then, no. God's existence and divinity are knowable to unaided human reason and even demonstrable:

  Rom. 1:20: For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they [the unbelieving Romans] are inexcusable [for not knowing God].

We also know what God wants for us:

  1 Thess. 4:3: For this is the will of God, your sanctification


The Dead Sea Scrolls and Protestant canon

No, the Dead Sea Scrolls have no effect on the Protestant view of Old Testament canon.

Let's take a look at what different books are included:

Old Testament (protocanonical) books

Genesis, Psalms, Isaiah etc.

Deuterocanonical books

Letter of Jeremiah, Wisdom of Sirach etc.

Other writings

Book of Noah
Book of Giants
Testament of Naphtali
Community Rule
War Scroll
Genesis Apocryphon
Cairo Geniza Testament of Levi
Book of Jubilees
Words of Moses
Rule of the Congregation
and many, many more.

Considering that the Dead Sea Scrolls include a very random selection of books, nothing about canonicity can be reliably deducted from them.


According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (in particular paragraphs #2673 through #2682 which explore the words of the Hail Mary) it seems as if the Hail Mary is considered a prayer. Here are a few excerpts:

"Beginning with Mary's unique cooperation with the working of the Holy Spirit, the Churches developed their prayer to the holy Mother of God, centering it on the person of Christ manifested in his mysteries..."
"Holy Mary, Mother of God...by entrusting ourselves to her prayer, we abandon ourselves to the will of God together with her: "Thy will be done."

Additionally, the Catechism calls Mary herself "the perfect prayer" and says that "when we pray to her, we are adhering with her to the plan of the Father, who sends his Son to save all men."


Can an uncatecized but baptized Catholic receive absolution from a priest?

The answer is simple: no, a priest cannot deny absolution simply because one is an “uncatechized” Catholic. The Code of Canon Law says,

  Sacred ministers cannot deny the sacraments* to those who seek them at appropriate times, are properly disposed, and are not prohibited by law from receiving them (Can.  843 §1).

“Uncatechized” Catholic is simply not a Canonical category, and so, on principle, such Baptized Catholics cannot be denied Confession or absolution.

Of course, to receive absolution, a person needs to be truly repentant and have a firm purpose of amendment (i.e., make the decision not to commit the sins confessed anymore), but that is the requirement for everyone.

As far as the validity of the sacrament, if the priest did not give absolution, then, unfortunately, there was no sacrament.

My suggestion would be to go to a different priest, and explain the situation. It would also be necessary to confess to him at least any mortal sins (those that one can remember since the last valid confession), in number and kind.

(As a side point, I would encourage those Catholics who have not received confirmation to look into receiving it. Confirmation completes the initiation that was begun in Baptism and gives them the strength of the Holy Spirit.)

* In this context, the law is referring to the Sacraments that the baptized faithful need in order to be right with God: confession, anointing of the sick, matrimony, confirmation, and especially the Eucharist. Holy Orders is a bit different, since it is never necessary for one’s personal salvation or friendship with God. The Church is never under an obligation to ordain someone, and, indeed, is gravely obliged to ordained only those persons that, in her judgment, really have a vocation to the priesthood or diaconate.


How prevalent is the group known as the 2x2's?

Wikipedia actually has an article on the group: Two by twos.  It's an anti-institutional-church "denomination" that formed at the end of the 19th century in Ireland, coming out of the Holiness movement.  They reject many traditional Christian beliefs, such as the Trinity.

As for its current membership, it appears to be focused in North America, Europe, and Australia.  Wikipedia lists registered names for the group in the countries of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Australia.  Estimates of the number of members worldwide vary widely, from several hundred thousand to a few million.  Wikipedia quotes several sources:

  During the 1980s, the Sydney Morning Herald gave an estimate of between 1 and 4 million members worldwide,(Gill 30 June 1984, p. 37) while a 2001 estimate put Australian membership at 70,000.(Giles 25 July 2001, p. 014) A sociology masters thesis from 1964 estimated U.S. membership at 300,000 to 500,000 and world membership as between 1 and 2 million.(Crow 1964, pp. 2, 16) Benton Johnson updated the metrics to arrive at a figure of 48,000 to 190,000 for the United States alone.(Johnson 1995, pp. 43–44) George Chryssides states that membership numbers are uncertain, giving an estimate for the United States during 1998 as ranging from 10,000 to 100,000 and a worldwide membership probably three times that figure.(Chryssides 2001b, pp. 330–331) Estimates in other reference materials fall somewhere in between these. (source)


The Rites of the Church do include prayers for the dead. It's not possible actually to absolve sins after death, but the dead are effectively helped by the prayers of the living. Prayers may be said by anyone; a priest or a deacon may also sprinkle the body with holy water.

A Catholic priest will certainly have access to prayers to use, and Peter has linked in his answer to those commended by the US Bishops' Conference, which are readily available online. The published rite does include a prayer asking for forgiveness of sin (and this—and many other prayers—may be prayed by anyone):

  Lord Jesus, our Redeemer,
  you willingly gave yourself up to death
  so that all people might be saved
  and pass from death into a new life.
  Listen to our prayers,
  look with favour on your people
  who mourn and pray for their sister N.
  Lord Jesus, holy and compassionate:
  forgive N. her sins.
  By dying you opened the gates of life
  for those who believe in you:
  do not let our sister be parted from you,
  but by your glorious power
  give her light, joy, and peace in heaven
  where you live for ever and ever.

"Absolution of the Dead" used to occur in the funeral Mass, but it has been reduced to silence in the modern rite. That title is a little misleading.

  Silence

  All pray in silence.

  Signs of farewell

  The coffin may now be sprinkled with holy water and incensed, or this may take place during or after the song of farewell. If the body was sprinkled with holy water during the rite of reception at the beginning of Mass, the sprinkling is ordinarily omitted in the rite of final commendation.

However, that ceremony used to be far more elaborate and include more extensive prayers praying for absolution, along the lines of the modern prayer quoted above. If the rite includes censing and sprinkling, it must be performed by a priest, but there seems no reason that the prayers themselves may not be prayed by anyone.

The current Order for Funerals in the Personal Ordinariates within the Catholic Church includes the following in place of the silence quoted above:

  Absolution at the Bier

  The Priest and ministers stand at the head of the deceased.

  The sorrow of death compassed me
  and the pains of hell came about me.

  Kyrie eleison.
  Christe eleison.
  Kyrie eleison.

  Enter not into judgment with thy servant, O Lord, for in thy
  sight shall no man living be justified, except thou grant unto
  him remission of all his sins. Therefore, we beseech thee, let
  not the sentence of thy judgment fall upon him, whom the
  faithful prayer of Christian people commendeth unto thee: but
  by the succour of thy grace let him, who, while he lived, was
  sealed with the sign of the Holy Trinity, be found worthy to
  escape the avenging judgment. Through Christ our Lord.

  The Sprinkling and the Censing

  This responsory may be used as the Priest goes round the
   bier, sprinkling with holy water, and incensing the body.

  Deliver me, O Lord, * from eternal death in that fearful day:
  * when the heavens and the earth shall be shaken;
  when thou shalt come again to judge the world by fire.

  Deliver me, O Lord, from eternal death in that fearful
   day: when the heavens and the earth shall be shaken;
   when thou shalt come again to judge the world by fire.

  O that day, that day of wrath, of calamity, and misery,
  a great and exceeding bitter day:
  when you shalt come again to judge the world by fire.

  Rest eternal grant unto them O Lord:
  and let light perpetual shine upon them.
  Deliver me, O Lord, from eternal death in that fearful
   day: when the heavens and the earth shall be shaken;
   when thou shalt come again to judge the world by fire.

The Sarum Use from which that ceremony is derived included two more censings of the body, between the prayer "Enter not..." and the Libera me ("Deliver me, O Lord."). The priest walked around the coffin, censing it, during the responsories; and then said the prayers at the head of the coffin. These were included in a draft order of service considered for the Ordinariates, although omitted in the final publication.

  First Censing

  Thou who didst raise Lazarus from the stinking tomb,A
   grant them rest, O Lord, and a habitation of mercy.
  Thou who didst raise Lazarus from the stinking tomb,
   grant them rest, O Lord, and a habitation of mercy.

  When thou shalt come to judge the quick and the dead,
   and the world by fire;
  grant them rest, O Lord, and a habitation of mercy.

  Kyrie eleison.
  Christe eleison.
  Kyrie eleison.

  O God to whom all live, to whom our bodies when they die do
  not perish but are transformed, we humbly beseech thee that,
  whatever ill thy servant committed which was contrary to thy
  will, through the devil’s deceit and his own iniquity and
  weakness, thou that art loving and merciful may in thy mercy
  wash away, and command that his soul be borne up by the
  hands of thy holy angels, to be brought into the bosom of thy
  patriarchs, Abraham thy friend, Isaac thy chosen one, and Jacob
  thy beloved, where sorrow, sadness, and sighing flee away, and
  the souls of thy faithful rejoice in felicity, and at the Last Day of
  great judgment grant that his soul receive its portion among thy
  saints and thine elect in the perpetual glory which no eye hath
  seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived but which
  thou hast prepared for those that love thee. Through Christ
  our Lord.

  Second Censing

  Alas for me, O Lord, who have sinned in my life;
   poor and wretched that I am, what can I do?
   Where can I flee if not to thee my God?
   Have mercy upon me
   when thou shalt come again on the Last Day.
  Alas for me, O Lord, who have sinned in my life;
   poor and wretched that I am, what can I do?
   Where can I flee if not to thee my God?
   Have mercy upon me
   when thou shalt come again on the Last Day.

  My soul is very sorrowful,
   but thou, O Lord, wilt make haste to help me
  when thou shalt come again on the Last Day.

  We beseech thee, O Lord, have mercy upon thy departed
  servant, that he, who in his intentions adhered to thy will, may
  not receive the reward of his deeds in punishment: in thy mercy
  grant him, whose lively faith joined him to the company of thy
  faithful, fellowship with the choirs of angels.

A I think this translation of Qui Lazarum resuscitasti a monumento fetidum, while poetic and literal, is rather unfortunate. Lazarus' grave was only thought to have "a bad odour" [Jn 11:39], but in fact there's no other reference to it at all. Foul might be better, but the rhythm requires two syllables. This may have contributed to the omission of these extra censings.


How did the Crusades affect the King's power?

They helped to break down feudalism by increasing the authority of kings.

Some nobles died in battle without leaving an heir. Their lands passed to the king.
Some nobles sold their land in an effort to raise money to pay the special tax levied by the king to offset the cost of the crusades.
Some nobles gave their serfs a chance to buy their freedom in an effort to raise money they needed to buy armor and weapons
Some young men who could buy their way out of feudal obligation joined the crusades. Many died. That reduced the work force. If a farm failed, it passed to the king.


Is celebrating Christmas required of Catholics?

As a Catholic, you are required to celebrate the "holy-day" of Christmas, as you mentioned, by going to Mass, receiving the Eucharist, giving honor and glory to God and celebrating Jesus' birth. However, you are not required to celebrate it in the "traditional tree in the house gift giving sense". These traditions, like many traditions on Christian holidays, represent something related to the holiday, but are not a necessity. What really is important is giving honor and glory to God on that day. To sum it up, it is not required to put up a tree, decorate or give gifts, you just need to make the holiday a holy-day. If you can find other ways to celebrate that give glory to God, do them. They are much more pleasing to Him than letting what has become mostly secular occupy your mind and heart.

P.S. There's nothing wrong with the extras. As long as Jesus is the center, they make nice additions!

Christ be with you!


What scriptural arguments are there, if any, that there is hell but it is not eternal?

What is the [common] scriptural basis, if any, for the Christian groups which teach that there is a hell but that it is not eternal?

Much of the trouble with the determination of “eternal” comes from the definition of the Geek word aion. It can mean a period of time like a lifetime, an age or true eternity. One of the Biblical proofs that aion does not always mean true eternity can be seen;

  Jude 1:7  Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in
  like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after
  strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance
  of eternal fire.

Here one might say that the effects are eternal rather than the fire, however that does not help impart support for the idea of eternal torment as torment that continues eternally.

Another problem in declaring the eternality of torment is the problem of “eternal” life.

  Romans 6:23  For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is
  eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

  John 10:28  And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never
  perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

One can ask if the gift of God is eternal life, then how do those who reject Christ merit or receive it and how can torment be truly eternal if life is not.

Another problem of the subject is our limited ability to understand the concept of eternity itself. This can be seen in part if we consider the question, if eternity is the end of time or time unending.

A further problem exists as we are told that punishment is in proportion to works.

  Revelation 20:12  And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before
  God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is
  the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which
  were written in the books, according to their works.

If one considers a hypothetical person who lived out his life in routine and harmless normality. His biggest crime was not being interested in Jesus. It is difficult to resolve the idea of eternal conscious torment with a merciful God.

There are only a few ways to consider this dilemma.

God is unjust.
Mans slightest infraction deserves eternal torment (making God just).
Torment is not eternal but proportionate.
The system is more complicated than we know or can understand.

There is a lot of flexibility in how to translate the word “eternal” (aion). Some translations (i.e. YLT), use the phrase “age lasting”.


Does any Church currently incorporate exorcism, three dunkings, and anointing in their baptism rite?

Does any Church currently incorporate exorcism, three separate immersions, and anointing in their baptism rite (with or without the nudity)?

The short answer is probably not. Although some do more or less share similar elements.

St. Hippolytus of Rome relates how baptism in The Early Church was administered in or around 215 AD in Rome as such:

  21 At the hour in which the cock crows, they shall first pray over the water. 2When
  they come to the water, the water shall be pure and flowing, that is, the water of a spring
  or a flowing body of water. 3Then they shall take off all their clothes. 4The children shall be baptized first. All of the children who can answer for themselves, let them answer. If there are any children who cannot answer for themselves, let their parents answer for them, or someone else from their family. 5After this, the men will be baptized. Finally, the women, after they have unbound their hair, and removed their jewelry. No one shall take any foreign object with themselves down into the water.

  6At the time determined for baptism, the bishop shall give thanks over some oil, which he puts in a vessel. It is called the Oil of Thanksgiving. 7He shall take some more oil and exorcise it. It is called the Oil of Exorcism. 8A deacon shall hold the Oil of Exorcism and stand on the left. Another deacon shall hold the Oil of Thanksgiving and stand on the right.

  9When the elder takes hold of each of them who are to receive baptism, he shall tell each of them to renounce, saying, "I renounce you Satan, all your servicea, and all your works." 10After he has said this, he shall anoint each with the Oil of Exorcism, saying, "Let every evil spirit depart from you." 11Then, after these things, the bishop passes each of them on nude to the elder who stands at the water. They shall stand in the water naked. A deacon, likewise, will go down with them into the water. 12When each of them to be baptized has gone down into the water, the one baptizing shall lay hands on each of them, asking, "Do you believe in God the Father Almighty?" 13And the one being baptized shall answer, "I believe." 14He shall then baptize each of them once, laying his hand upon each of their heads. 15Then he shall ask, "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and died, and rose on the third day living from the dead, and ascended into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of the Father, the one coming to judge the living and the dead?" 16When each has answered, "I believe," he shall baptize a second time. 17Then he shall ask, "Do you believe in the Holy Spirit and the Holy Church and the resurrection of the flesh?" 18Then each being baptized shall answer, "I believe." And thus let him baptize the third time.

  19Afterward, when they have come up out of the water, they shall be anointed by the
  elder with the Oil of Thanksgiving, saying, "I anoint you with holy oil in the name of Jesus Christ." 20Then, drying themselves, they shall dress and afterwards gather in the church. - The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus of Rome

Let us remember that this was the baptismal practice as was practiced in Rome in the third century.

Although the wording used in the above formula of baptism is slightly different than what we are accustomed to hear, the Trinitarian formulation is still in tact.

The Catholic Church still permits baptism by either immersion or by pouring water over the head of the catechumen. The Early Church practiced pouring over the head during baptism for those who were elderly or seriously ill.

The liturgy and how the sacraments are administered are never stagnate; they are administered by the Church(es) as the people of God move throughout the centuries. There is always an organic development so to speak in how the liturgy and the sacraments are administered, from century to century.

As I have said the Catholic Church still permits baptism, either by immersion or by pouring water over the head of her catechumens. It would still be permitted to baptize an adult by immersion while using the formula now in place within the Church.

For a baptism to be valid the following must be observed according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church

  1278 The essential rite of Baptism consists in immersing the candidate in water or pouring water on his head, while pronouncing the invocation of the Most Holy Trinity: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

I have seen priests, while pouring the water over the head of infant and pronouncing the trinitarian formula poured the water over the head in three separate pourings, one in the name of the each person of the Sacred Trinity.

In the same way, it is conceivable, but doubtful that an immersion baptism could be administered in a similar fashion. Doubtful, because this not the General manner of administering this sacrament in our days.

As far as exorcisms and anointings are concerned, they are still administered within the Catholic Church.

The modern Rite of Baptism for One Child,for example, still incorporates exorcisms and anointings in her baptisms.

As for the administration of this sacrament while being nude that was certainly phased out because of issues of modesty were involved.


Was the Athanasian Creed ever translated into Koine Greek? If so, where can I find the text?

After a lot of searching, I found out that the Athanasian Creed does, in fact, exist in several Koine Greek versions. Here is one version of it:

Όποιος θέλει να σωθεί, είναι αναγκαίο πρώτα απ' όλα, να τηρεί την καθολική(ανοικτή σ' όλους, παγκόσμια, δεν εννοεί την Ρωμαιοκαθολική) πίστη.
Όποιος δεν την διαφυλάξει πλήρη και απαραβίαστη, χωρίς αμφιβολία θα χαθεί αιώνια.
Η καθολική πίστη λοιπόν είναι αυτή: Τιμούμε ένα Θεό εν Τριάδι, και την Τριάδα εν Μονάδι.
Χωρίς να συγχέουμε τα πρόσωπα, χωρίς να διαιρούμε τη Θεία Ουσία.
Γιατί άλλο Πρόσωπο είναι ο Πατέρας, άλλο ο Υιός κι άλλο το Πνεύμα το Άγιο.
Αλλά είναι μία η Θειότητα του Πατρός, και του Υιού, και του Αγίου Πνεύματος, ίση σε δόξα, συναιώνια σε μεγαλοπρέπεια.
Ότι είναι ο Πατέρας, είναι και ο Υιός, και το Άγιο Πνεύμα.
Άκτιστος (αδημιούργητος) ο Πατέρας, άκτιστος ο Υιός, άκτιστο και το Άγιο Πνεύμα.
Άπειρος ο Πατήρ, άπειρος ο Υιός, άπειρο το Άγιο Πνεύμα.
Αιώνιος ο Πατέρας, αιώνιος ο Υιός, αιώνιο το Άγιο Πνεύμα.
Και όμως δεν είναι τρεις αιώνιοι, αλλά ένας αιώνιος.
Όπως δεν είναι τρεις άκτιστοι, ούτε τρεις άπειροι, αλλά ένας άκτιστος και ένας άπειρος.
Παρομοίως, παντοδύναμος είναι ο Πατήρ, παντοδύναμος ο Υιός, παντοδύναμο το Άγιο Πνεύμα.
Και όμως δεν είναι τρεις παντοδύναμοι, αλλά ένας παντοδύναμος.
Έτσι Θεός είναι ο Πατέρας, Θεός ο Υιός, Θεός το Άγιο Πνεύμα.
Και όμως δεν είναι τρεις θεοί, αλλά ένας Θεός.
Έτσι Κύριος είναι ο Πατήρ, Κύριος ο Υιός, Κύριος το Άγιο Πνεύμα.
Και όμως δεν είναι τρεις Κύριοι, αλλά ένας Κύριος.
Γιατί, όπως μας υποχρεώνει η χριστιανική αλήθεια να αναγνωρίζουμε το κάθε Πρόσωπο να είναι Θεός και Κύριος αφ' εαυτού Του.
Έτσι και η καθολική θρησκεία μας απαγορεύει να λέμε ότι υπάρχουν τρεις Θεοί και Κύριοι.
Ο Πατήρ δεν έχει φτιαχτεί από κανέναν: ούτε έχει δημιουργηθεί, ούτε έχει γεννηθεί.
Ο Υιός, είναι μόνο του Πατρός. Δεν είναι κτιστός ούτε δημιουργημένος, αλλά γεννημένος.
Το Άγιο Πνεύμα είναι του Πατρός. Δεν είναι κτιστό ούτε δημιουργημένο, ούτε γεννημένο, αλλά εκπορευόμενο.
Έτσι υπάρχει ένας Πατήρ, όχι τρεις Πατέρες. Ένας Υιός, όχι τρεις Υιοί. Ένα Άγιο Πνεύμα, όχι τρία Άγια Πνεύματα.
Και σ' αυτή την Τριάδα κανείς δεν προηγείται και κανείς δεν έπεται, κανείς δεν είναι μεγαλύτερος ή μικρότερος (από τον άλλο).
Αλλά καθ' ολοκληρία τα τρία πρόσωπα είναι συναιώνια και ίσα μεταξύ τους.
Έτσι ώστε σε όλα τα πράγματα, όπως έχει ειπωθεί παραπάνω, η Μονάδα εν Τριάδι, και η Τριάδα εν Μονάδι πρέπει να λατρεύεται.
Όποιος θέλει να σωθεί, έτσι πρέπει να σκέπτεται για την Τριάδα.
Επιπλέον είναι απαραίτητο για την αιώνια σωτηρία, να πιστεύει σωστά στην ενσάρκωση του Κυρίου μας Ιησού Χριστού.
Γιατί η ορθή πίστη είναι αυτή που πιστεύουμε και ομολογούμε, ότι ο Κύριός μας Ιησούς Χριστός, Υιός του Θεού, είναι Θεός και άνθρωπος.
Είναι Θεός από την ουσία του Πατέρα Του, γεννημένος πριν από τους κόσμους. Και άνθρωπος από την ουσία της μητέρας Του, γεννημένος μέσα στον κόσμο.
Τέλειος Θεός, τέλειος άνθρωπος. Αποτελούμενος από ψυχή λογική και ανθρώπινη σάρκα.
Ίσος με τον Πατέρα όσον αφορά τη Θεότητα. Κατώτερος απ' τον Πατέρα όσον αφορά την ανθρώπινη φύση Του.
Όμως παρότι είναι Θεός και άνθρωπος, δεν είναι δύο, αλλά ένας Χριστός.
Ένας, όχι με μετατροπή της θεότητας σε σάρκα, αλλά με πρόσληψη της ανθρωπότητας από τον Θεό.
Ένας, ολόκληρος, όχι δια της σύγχυσης των ουσιών (της θείας & ανθρώπινης ουσίας), αλλά στην ενότητα του Προσώπου.
Γιατί όπως η λογική ψυχή και η σάρκα κάνουν έναν άνθρωπο, έτσι ο Θεός και ο Άνθρωπος είναι Ένας Χριστός.
που υπέφερε για τη σωτηρία μας. Κατέβηκε στην κόλαση. Την τρίτη μέρα αναστήθηκε από τους νεκρούς.
Ανελήφθη στους ουρανούς, κάθισε εκ δεξιών του Θεού Πατρός του Παντοδύναμου.
Από όπου και θα έρθει να κρίνει ζώντες και νεκρούς.
Στην έλευση του οποίου όλοι οι άνθρωποι θα αναστηθούν με τα σώματά τους
και θα δώσουν λόγο για τα έργα τους.
Κι αυτοί που έχουν έργα καλά, θα μεταβούν σε αιώνια ζωή, κι αυτοί που έχουν έργα κακά, σε αιώνια κόλαση.
Αυτή είναι η καθολική πίστη, την οποία αν δεν πιστεύει κανείς ειλικρινά και σταθερά, δεν μπορεί να σωθεί. Αμήν.

Η Αγία Τριάδα


Why does church tradition teach that one third of the angels fell with Lucifer when no verse supports that

@BYE points in the right direction. Some of the prophecies in Revelation look backwards to events that occurred before John lived, because the contest between Satan and God goes back to the beginning of the world.

  12 A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with
  the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2 She
  was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. 3
  Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with
  seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. 4 Its tail
  swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. (Revelation 12:1-4)

Verse four is interpreted by some to represent angels as stars. Thus the stars that fall to the earth are fallen angels, and they number one third of all stars, hence one third of all angels.

  Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

  drew—Greek, present tense, "draweth," "drags down." His dragging down the stars with his tail (lashed back and forward in his fury)
  implies his persuading to apostatize, like himself, and to become
  earthy, those angels and also once eminent human teachers who had
  formerly been heavenly (compare Re 12:1; 1:20; Isa 14:12).

This commentary considers several possible meanings, including the stars being angels or martyred Christians.

  Expositor's Greek Testament

  Revelation 12:4. The symbolism is a
  reminiscence of an ætiological myth in astrology (cf. the cauda of the
  constellation Scorpio) and of the primitive view which regarded the
  dark cloud as a snake enfolding the luminaries of heaven in its
  hostile coils (Job 3:8; Job 26:13, with A. B. Davidson’s notes). Thus
  the Iranians (S. B. E. iv. p. lxxiii., Darmesteter) described the
  fiend as a serpent or dragon not on the score of craftiness but
  “because the storm fiend envelops the goddess of light with the coils
  of the cloud as with a snake’s fold”. The same play of imagination
  would interpret eclipses and falling stars, and, when the pious were
  compared to stars (as in Egyptian theology, Plut. de Iside, 21), it
  was but a step to the idea of Daniel 8. (cf. Sib. Or. ver. 512 f., the
  battle of the stars), where Antiochus Epiphanes does violence to some
  devout Israelites who are characterised as stars flung rudely down to
  earth (i.e., martyred, 1 Maccabees 1.) Originally, this description of
  the dragon lashing his tail angrily and sweeping down a third of the
  stars probably referred to the seduction of angels from their heavenly
  rank (so 8–9) to serve his will (Weiss). But John, in recasting the
  tradition, may have thought of the Danielic application, i.e., of the
  devil succeeding in crushing by martyrdom a certain number of God’s
  people. In this event, they would include at least, if they are not to
  be identified with, the pre-Christian martyrs of Judaism (cf. Hebrews
  11:32 f. Matthew 23:35).—ἕστηκεν, a conventional posture of the
  ancient dragon cf. e.g., Pliny, H. N. viii. 3, “nec flexu multiplici
  ut reliquae serpentes corpus impellit, sed celsus et erectus in medio
  incedens”; ibid. viii. 14, for serpents devouring children. The mother
  of Zoroaster had also a vision of wild beasts waiting to devour her
  child at its birth. This international myth of the divine child
  menaced at birth readily lent itself to moralisation, or afforded
  terms for historical applications, e.g., the abortive attack on Moses,
  the prototype of messiah (Baldensperger, 141, 142) at his birth (Acts
  7:20 f.) and the vain efforts of Herod against the messiah. The
  animosity of Pytho for Leto was due to a prophecy that the latter’s
  son would vanquish him.

This commentary also agrees that the stars are angels:

  Pulpit Commentary

  Verse 4. - And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth; draweth (Revised
  Version). Not the stars with which the woman is crowned (see ver. 1),
  but other stars. In describing the vast power of the devil, St. John
  seems to allude to the tremendous result of his rebellious conduct in
  heaven, in effecting the fall of other angels with himself (Jude 1:6).


If only those who died after Jesus death are among the ones that go to heaven, how do JWs view the ascension of Elijah?

Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Elijah indeed experienced a miraculous event when he was caught up into the heavens.
As all bible students know there are different meanings of heaven in the scriptures.
Your question indicates that you are of the belief that the heavens that Elijah ascended to was the dwelling place of God and angels. Jehovah’s witnesses do not share this view.
Rather we believe that it was into the atmospheric heavens where clouds are found that the miracle took Elijah.
After being caught away to the clouds he was transported to a different location on earth.
Insight on the Scriptures published by Jehovah’s Witnesses speaks about the different meanings of heaven in the Bible and on the ascension of Elijah it says:

Ascension to Heaven. At 2 Kings 2:11, 12 the prophet Elijah is described as “ascending in the windstorm to the heavens.” The heavens here referred to are the atmospheric heavens in which windstorms occur, not the spiritual heavens of God’s presence. Elijah did not die at the time of such ascension, but he continued to live for a number of years after his heavenly transportation away from his successor Elisha. Nor did Elijah upon death ascend to the spiritual heavens, since Jesus, while on earth, clearly stated that “no man has ascended into heaven.” (Joh 3:13; see ELIJAH No. 1 (Elisha Succeeds Him).) At Pentecost, Peter likewise said of David that he “did not ascend to the heavens.” (Ac 2:34) In reality, there is nothing in the Scriptures to show that a heavenly hope was held out to God’s servants prior to the coming of Christ Jesus. Such hope first appears in Jesus’ expressions to his disciples (Mt 19:21, 23-28; Lu 12:32; Joh 14:2, 3) and was fully comprehended by them only after Pentecost of 33 C.E.—Ac 1:6-8; 2:1-4, 29-36; Ro 8:16, 17.
The Scriptures show that Christ Jesus was the first one to ascend from earth to the heavens of God’s presence. (1Co 15:20; Heb 9:24) By such ascension and his presentation of his ransom sacrifice there, he ‘opened the way’ for those who would follow—the spirit-begotten members of his congregation. (Joh 14:2, 3; Heb 6:19, 20; 10:19, 20) In their resurrection these must bear “the image of the heavenly one,” Christ Jesus, in order to ascend to the heavens of the spirit plane, for “flesh and blood” cannot inherit that heavenly Kingdom.—1Co 15:42-50.


Do pre-tribulational, pre-millenial theologies reconcile with Jehovah's Witnesses

Do pre-tribulational, pre-millennial theologies reconcile with Jehovah's Witnesses?
As far as I can ascertain, the answer to your main question must be “no”.  However, there is an element of common ground between Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses when it comes to the date of what is described as Christ’s “parousia” or invisible, heavenly presence.

History: Adventist Nelson H Barbour believed that Christ returned invisibly in 1874, although Adventist William Miller had previously claimed the second coming was due around 1843.  Barbour and his group rendered 'coming' as 'presence' and came up with the view that the Second Coming was an invisible event.  Charles Taze Russell and Barbour believed that Christ's invisible return in 1874 would be followed (in the spring of 1878) by the Rapture.  When the Rapture failed to materialise, Barbour came up with 'new light' on this and other doctrines, but Russell was not persuaded.  NOTE: Barbour and Miller were NOT Seventh Day Adventists.

Seventh Day Adventist Beliefs:  Adventists believe the second coming of Christ will be literal, personal, visible and worldwide.   Jesus will resurrect the righteous dead and to then take all of the righteous back to Heaven with Him, as His Bride, to take part in the Marriage Supper of the Lamb in His Father's House. The Bible teaches that the entire world, including The Bride, will have to experience the Final Tribulation of three and one-half years before Jesus Christ returns the Second time to receive His Bride.  Adventists believe in a third coming of Christ to resurrect the unrighteous dead.  This is when the Holy City, New Jerusalem, will descend to the earth with all the righteous inside of it.  https://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental-beliefs/

The SDA post-tribulation/pre-millennial view of the rapture and the tribulation bears no resemblance to what Jehovah’s Witnesses expect to happen although the Witnesses fully expect that the majority of them will have to go through the tribulation.  While researching the official Jehovah’s Witness web site for information on 1914 and dispensationalism, I found a 1985 Watchtower article, part of which says this:

The January 1, 1914, issue of The Watch Tower left room for this development, stating that although “the Year 1914 is the last one of what the Bible terms ‘Gentile Times’ . . . we are by no means confident that this year, 1914, will witness as radical and swift changes of dispensation as we have expected....  Also among those getting a blessing would be what the Bible describes as “a great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues.” Not until 1935 was it fully understood that this “great crowd” would be composed of persons “that come out of the great tribulation,” that is to say, those who abandon Satan’s organization and take their stand on God’s side, so as to survive the execution of God’s judgment. For some five decades now, the work of gathering this “great crowd” has been proceeding in accordance with Jehovah’s purpose. We can rejoice that divine judgment will not be executed until this lifesaving work has been completed.—Revelation 7:9, 14.  https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1985321?q=dispensation&p=par

The work of gathering the “great crowd” of persons “that come out of the great tribulation” continues, more than eight decades since 1935 – but the great tribulation is not here yet.  Here is another quote with regard to what is called “the Gospel dispensation” and “the new Millennial dispensation”:

However, the Watch Tower issue of December 1, 1894, said: “But as that work of organizing the church of the new Gospel dispensation was no part of the harvest work of the old Jewish dispensation, so the present harvest work or reaping of the Gospel dispensation is also separate and distinct from the work of the new Millennial dispensation now drawing on. . . . It is plain that the forming of a visible organization of such gathered out ones would be out of harmony with the spirit of the divine plan; and if done would seem to indicate on the part of the church a desire to conform to the now popular idea of organization or confederacy. (See Isa. 8:12) The work now is not organization, but division, just as it was in the Jewish harvest proper. (Matt. 10:34-36) https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1985203?q=dispensation&p=par

As it turns out, this “visible organization of such gathered out ones” has continued from 1894 till now – 125 years – and the “new millennial dispensation” is still some time future.  I mention this because it illustrates how expectations pre-1914 and post-1914 concerning the tribulation and the millennium continue to evolve.
This 1993 Watchtower article https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1993041 discusses the official Jehovah’s Witness view of the “rapture”, Christ’s “presence”, being “caught away” and survival for those who are left behind.  The section “Caught Away- How?” quotes from 1 Thessalonians 4:17: “Afterward we the living, who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we shall always be with the Lord.”  It then says this:

As in the case of faithful early Christians, death as a human is necessary for them to be united with Christ in heaven.... Upon dying in faithfulness during Christ’s presence, each one of the remnant of spiritual Israel instantaneously receives his heavenly reward. “In the twinkling of an eye,” he is resurrected as a spirit creature and “caught away” to meet Jesus and to serve as a co-ruler in the Kingdom of the heavens. But what about all others worshiping Jehovah? As the end of this wicked system approaches, will they also be caught away to heaven? https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1993041

Speaking of those Jehovah’s Witnesses who do not have a heavenly hope and who will be alive when the tribulation period starts, the article says this:

By exercising faith, you may also be among the survivors of the great tribulation, privileged to welcome back the millions who will be resurrected to life on earth. And what a joy it will be to live under God’s Kingdom in the hands of Jesus Christ and his co-rulers, who will have been ‘caught away to meet the Lord’ by being resurrected to life in the heavenly realm!  https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1993041#h=22

A more recent publication (October 2019) had this to say about how they view the great tribulation and what will happen to those of the “anointed remnant” class, those who have a heavenly hope:

14 During the great tribulation a change will take place regarding the brothers who take the lead on earth.  At some point, all anointed ones who are still on earth will be gathered to heaven to share in the war of Armageddon.  This means that the Governing Body will no longer be with us on earth. However, the great crowd will remain organized.  Capable brothers from among the other sheep will take the lead. We will need to show our loyalty by supporting these brothers and by following their God-given direction.  Our survival will depend on it!  https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-study-october-2019/stay-faithful-through-great-tribulation/

“The timing of the gathering indicates that all anointed ones will be in heaven before God’s war of Armageddon begins. In heaven, the 144,000 co-rulers with Christ will receive authority to share with Jesus in wielding “an iron rod” of destruction against all enemies of God’s Kingdom.” Source:  2014 Jehovah’s Witness publication God’s Kingdom Rules, chapter 21, page 228.

To sum up with regard to the beliefs of Jehovah’s Witnesses:

Jehovah’s Witness beliefs regarding Christ’s “Second Coming”: Jehovah’s Witnesses say that Jesus second “presence” happened in October 1914 when he became King.  This was not a literal “coming” because this event was invisible and only they understood what was happening in the heavenly realms, namely, that Jesus began to rule as King from heaven.   After the tribulation period Jesus (who is known in heaven as Michael the Archangel) will bring judgment on all who oppose him and who persecute his people (Jehovah’s Witnesses).

Jehovah’s Witness beliefs regarding the “Rapture”: Although Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that their “anointed remnant” (those of the heavenly class who are alive at the time of the tribulation) will be taken up into heaven as spirits, all other Witnesses will have to remain behind and go through the tribulation period and the battle of Armageddon when they will be rescued from harm.

Source documents: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-study-october-2019/stay-faithful-through-great-tribulation/  Paragraphs 14 and 17 explain how the resurrected anointed ones (including the Governing Body) will return to earth with the angels.  https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1993041 says they will be “caught away” as spirits.
Additional material: https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/great-tribulation/
Correction:  15 Does this mean that there will be a “rapture” of the anointed ones? Many in Christendom believe, according to this teaching, that Christians will be bodily caught up from the earth. Then, they expect that Jesus will visibly return to rule the earth. However, the Bible clearly shows that “the sign of the Son of man” will appear in heaven and that Jesus will come “on the clouds of heaven.” (Matt. 24:30) Both of these expressions imply invisibility. Additionally, “flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s Kingdom.” So those who will be taken to heaven will first need to be “changed, in a moment, in the blink of an eye, during the last trumpet.” * (Read 1 Corinthians 15:50-53.) Therefore, while we do not use the term “rapture” here because of its wrong connotation, the remaining faithful anointed will be gathered together in an instant of time.  Source: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/w20150715/rapture-anointed-great-tribulation/
Conclusion:  From what I have read I can only conclude that Jehovah’s Witnesses do not subscribe to a multi-staged return of Christ.  They say Jesus the man is dead – forever dead; that Jesus was not resurrected with a body; he is a spirit and it is Michael the Archangel who returns.  Jehovah’s Witnesses do not subscribe to a conventional pre-tribulational, pre-millennial theology.  They may believe that a few thousand of them will be taken up to heaven at some point, but they do not say if it will be before or during the tribulation period. However, it will happen before Armageddon and the Millennial Reign.  The vast majority of Witnesses will have to go through the entire tribulation waiting for Armageddon when they will be "rescued" by the heavenly forces who destroy all of God's  enemies. The survivors will not be "raptured" or go to heaven - they expect to live forever on a paradise earth.


How big was the wilderness in which John the Baptist lived and preached?

While the exact location of John's ministry is not known, we know that it was around the Jordan, with John 1:28 specifically placing it at "Bethany beyond the Jordan." The traditional location is places it just north of the northeastern corner of the Dead Sea. Jerusalem, the center of Second Temple Judaism, sits at the top of a verdant hill country. But as one makes the 10-mile downhill trip towards the Jordan, the land becomes a barren wasteland devoid of vegetation, except for the area immediately adjacent to the Jordan.  This area extends from a few miles outside Jerusalem all the way through the Jordan Rift Valley until you hit the major settlements in modern day Jordan.  The valley itself is about 10 miles wide (measurements taken from Google Maps).

Your question about how he managed to gain attention in a remote area is a good one.  One thing to keep in mind is that the late Second Temple Period is a time of religious unrest, when many different groups and figures were competing for their vision of Judaism to be the dominant strain.  Sects like the Pharisees and Sadducees, which focused on the study of Torah and Temple piety respectively, were generally centered in more populous areas (especially Jerusalem).  However, there were more than a few other groups who made their home in the wilderness, including John, the Essenes/Qumran community, and eventually the revolutionaries of Masada.  So John's location is not without precedent.

Bearing this in mind, along with Jerusalem's relative proximity to the area where John is supposed to have been preaching, we can paint a picture of a murmur among the people of Jerusalem about this man and his disciples in the nearby wilderness, enough of a murmur that the religious leaders came out to see what the commotion was all about.  Three out of the four Gospels specifically mention people coming from Jerusalem (John 1:19, Mark 1:4, Matthew 3:5), which makes sense based on what we have said.  What's perhaps more remarkable is not that the people of Jerusalem heard of John, but that Jesus did.  From all the way in Nazareth, it's over 60 miles to get to that part of the country.  Jesus enters this scene as the outsider, the country boy from the backwoods of the Galilee among a crowd of the educated and the urbanites.