Is the Pope an Antichrist?

[Jude3b]

Colossians 1:18 states that "Christ is the head of the Church," yet Romanism teaches that the Pope is the Head of the Church. Doesn't that make the Pope an Antichrist???
Sincerely, Jude 3b

[studyhound]

Colossians 1:18 states that "Christ is the head of the Church," yet Romanism teaches that the Pope is the Head of the Church. Doesn't that make the Pope an Antichrist???
Sincerely, Jude 3b


Pope an antichrist, Naaa, an antichrist deigns the Father and Son(as God) or deigns that Jesus came in the flesh.



See the Four times antichrist is spoken of in the Bible.





(1Jo 2:18 WEB)

Little children, these are the end times, and as you heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have arisen. By this we know that it is the end times.



(1Jo 2:22 WEB)

Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the Antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son.



(1Jo 4:3 WEB)

and every spirit who doesn't confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God, and this is the spirit of the antichrist, of whom you have heard that it comes. Now it is in the world already.



(2Jo 1:7 WEB)

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who don't confess that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the Antichrist.

[Xavier]

No.

[Jude3b]

Dear Studyhound: " Who is the liar but he who denies that JESUS IS THE CHRIST? THIS IS THE ANTICHRIST," (I John 2:22)
Now please consider this paraphrase:
"Who is the liar but he who denies that JESUS IS THE ALL SUFFICIENT SAVIOR? This is the Antichrist, who states that salvation is found in the Roman Catholic religion and not in the all sufficient Savior Christ Jesus, as revealed in the Word of God.
Sincerely, Jude 3b

[John Reece]

Dear Studyhound: " Who is the liar but he who denies that JESUS IS THE CHRIST? THIS IS THE ANTICHRIST," (I John 2:22)
Now please consider this paraphrase:
"Who is the liar but he who denies that JESUS IS THE ALL SUFFICIENT SAVIOR? This is the Antichrist, who states that salvation is found in the Roman Catholic religion and not in the all sufficient Savior Christ Jesus, as revealed in the Word of God.
Sincerely, Jude 3b

Jude 3b,

You alter Scripture to fit your agenda, without presenting documentation that the Pope fits the definition you contrive by means of altering Scripture.

You are coming across as a fanatical anti-Catholic.


fa·nat·i·cal
adj.

Possessed with or motivated by excessive, irrational zeal.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2003 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Blessings,

John

[Stephen]

Dear Studyhound: " Who is the liar but he who denies that JESUS IS THE CHRIST? THIS IS THE ANTICHRIST," (I John 2:22)
Now please consider this paraphrase:
"Who is the liar but he who denies that JESUS IS THE ALL SUFFICIENT SAVIOR? This is the Antichrist, who states that salvation is found in the Roman Catholic religion and not in the all sufficient Savior Christ Jesus, as revealed in the Word of God.
Sincerely, Jude 3bBut what of the other verse that says the antichrist will deny the Father and the Son?

[studyhound]

Dear Studyhound: " Who is the liar but he who denies that JESUS IS THE CHRIST? THIS IS THE ANTICHRIST," (I John 2:22)

Now please consider this paraphrase:

"Who is the liar but he who denies that JESUS IS THE ALL SUFFICIENT SAVIOR? This is the Antichrist, who states that salvation is found in the Roman Catholic religion and not in the all sufficient Savior Christ Jesus, as revealed in the Word of God.

Sincerely, Jude 3b






Oh come on Jude can’t you make an argument with out twisting the plain meaning of scripture to fit your agenda. I mean really I have done enough reading of different end time views that even I could come up with a better argument. If your going to be this “great protestant” Pope Killer at least do it from the frame work of a sound biblical argument, because if not the intelligent catholic apologists are going to rip you a new one. (of course that could be why you posting by the dozens rather than staying on one thread and defending your view :troll: )

:studyhound:

[rocketman]

If your going to be this “great protestant” Pope Killer at least do it from the frame work of a sound biblical argument, because if not the intelligent catholic apologists are going to rip you a new one. (of course that could be why you posting by the dozens rather than staying on one thread and defending your view :troll: )[/font]

:studyhound:
:cheers: :highfive: :cheers:

[Sir Yap Alot]

Of course the pope is A Antichrist ,I believe the vatican is the whore of babylon.

We have pictures of him kissing the Koran and receiving the Hindu mark of Shiva on his forehead by a Hindu priestess. And of him sitting on a chair with the upside down cross carved in the back, the same cross that Satanists use in their ritual

http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/ChristBearer72/koran.html
http://www.biblestudysite.com/answers1.htm


The Catholic Church teaches we evolved over millions of years, they also pray to marry and other dead human beings (Saints) which has clearly been condemned in the Bible.

Most Protestants don't realize that heresy the Catholic Church teaches, just do some research about what they believe and teach, it's all over the Internet with documents to back it up.


We also have the story of a ex-Nun that tells us what takes place within the convent, Sister Charlotte's testimony can be read all over the Internet or you can download the audio and listen to her testimony from her own words

The audio can be downloaded from here http://www.spirit-sword.com/ or http://www.nisbett.com/realaudio/charlotte.htm


Or read her testimony here http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/charlot1.htm

She goes into great detail about the rituals she had to go through like laying in a empty coffin, the same ritual that Satanists and skull and Crossbone members go through.

She talkes about how the priests used the nuns for sex because the nuns are married to God and the priest are Gods replacement on earth. If any nun refuses to have sex with the priest they are systematically tortured.

She talks about a dungeon chamber in the basement with the door permanently locked, she eventually found the key to that door and found other nuns that had gone insane because of the torture.

Nostradamus and St. Malachy predicted the total destruction of the Catholic Church, as does the book of Revelation, the beast and the 10 kings totally annihilate the whore of babylon.

[spl_cadet]

Of course the pope is A Antichrist ,I believe the vatican is the whore of babylon.

We have pictures of him kissing the Koran and receiving the Hindu mark of Shiva on his forehead by a Hindu priestess.

Done simply as respect (though he probably shouldn't have.


And of him sitting on a chair with the upside down cross carved in the back, the same cross that Satanists use in their ritual

Actually, it's to symbolize the fact that St. Peter was crucified upside down. The pope is the successor of St. Peter.


The Catholic Church teaches we evolved over millions of years,

Nope.


they also pray to marry

I'm desperate, ok? :tongue:


and other dead human beings (Saints) which has clearly been condemned in the Bible.

He is God of the Living, not of the dead.


Most Protestants don't realize that heresy the Catholic Church teaches, just do some research about what they believe and teach, it's all over the Internet with documents to back it up.

Better yet, check out the Catechism of the Catholic Church.


We also have the story of a ex-Nun that tells us what takes place within the convent, Sister Charlotte's testimony can be read all over the Internet or you can download the audio and listen to her testimony from her own words

Does she ever name the convent?


She talkes about how the priests used the nuns for sex because the nuns are married to God and the priest are Gods replacement on earth.

Uh, no. Priests are not God's replacement on Earth.


Nostradamus and St. Malachy predicted the total destruction of the Catholic Church, as does the book of Revelation, the beast and the 10 kings totally annihilate the whore of babylon.

Ok, you condemn praying to the saints, but you believe a spiritist like Nostradamus? :ahem:

And where does St. Malachy predict the destruction of the Church?

[tizzidale]

I can't believe you are passing the unverifiable tripe as proof. Please get a clue.

[Sir Yap Alot]

1.) Show me any historical reference of Peter being crucified upside down.

2.) Catholic schools teach evolution, FACT, other Christian schools do not teach evolution, FACT.

"In 1950, Pope Plus XII declared that Darwinian evolution was a serious hypothesis, and that it was permissible for Catholics to believe in it. In October, 1996 Pope John Paul II went further declaring "New knowledge leads us to recognize in the theory of evolution more than a hypothesis.... The convergence, neither sought nor induced, of results of work done independently one from the other, constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory." (Christian News, Nov. 18, 1~96)"

3.)Read Sister Charlotte's testimony for yourself, or better yet listen to it. It's all documented

4.) You can read all the documented evidence on Mary worship http://www.remnantofgod.org/ .
They also teach (Biblically false) Mary never died but ascended into heaven.

5.) I said the convent taught Sister Charlotte that the priests were Gods replacement in order to induce them into sex. In fact the Catholic church teaches the Pope is Gods replacement on earth.

" Roman Catholic religion claims that the Pope replaces Jesus Christ by being the Vicar of Christ. They claim that Vatican City is the eternal city that replaces Jerusalem. They teach that their pagan holidays replace the feast days of God and they teach that the church replaces the Israel of God."

6.) Prophecy of St Malachy
http://www.catholic-pages.com/grabbag/malachy.asp

"The last of these prophecies concerns the end of the world and is as follows: "In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church there will reign Peter the Roman, who will feed his flock amid many tribulations, after which the seven-hilled city will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people. The End." It has been noticed concerning Petrus Romanus, who according to St. Malachy's list is to be the last pope, that the prophecy does not say that no popes will intervene between him and his predecessor designated Gloria olivoe. It merely says that he is to be the last, so that we may suppose as many popes as we please before "Peter the Roman". Cornelius a Lapide refers to this prophecy in his commentary "On the Gospel of St. John" (C. xvi) and "On the Apocalypse" (cc. xvii-xx), and he endeavours to calculate according to it the remaining years of time"

7.) I'm sure you've heard of the Third vision of Fatima. The Catholic church does not want to admit this is future tense and tries to pass it off as the assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II.

[Queen]

Nah, just a.........ahem.......nut

:whistle:

[John Reece]

. . . Sister Charlotte's testimony can be read all over the Internet . . .

. . . 3.) Read Sister Charlotte's testimony for yourself, or better yet listen to it. It's all documented

I read it. There is no verifiable documentation; in fact, there is no documentation at all, let alone verifiable documentation. There is nothing about it that distinguishes it from a made-up spoof. I have heard such testimony presented to a gullible audience that was completely hoodwinked by the testimony (even the pastor was taken in by it), and then later found irrefutable proof that the testimony was a hoax and that the person who gave the testimony was a fraud (a fact that the person perpetrating the hoax readily admitted when the truth became known).

The fact that something "can be read all over the Internet" is no indication that it is true or verifiable.

[spl_cadet]

1.) Show me any historical reference of Peter being crucified upside down.

Acts of Peter.


2.) Catholic schools teach evolution, FACT, other Christian schools do not teach evolution, FACT.

Really? No Protestant school teaches evolution? Prove it.



And we are not obliged to believe in evolution (nor allowed to believe in total evolution). I'm OEC myself.

[quote]
3.)Read Sister Charlotte's testimony for yourself, or better yet listen to it. It's all documented

I've read part of it before. I repeat: What is the name and location of the convent?


4.) You can read all the documented evidence on Mary worship

Philomarianism, aka Collyridianism, has been denounced since it first popped up in the fourth century.


http://www.remnantofgod.org/ .
They also teach (Biblically false) Mary never died but ascended into heaven.

Not true. She was assumed (like Enoch and Elijah) at the end of her life. Whether she died first or not we do not know.


5.) I said the convent taught Sister Charlotte that the priests were Gods replacement in order to induce them into sex. In fact the Catholic church teaches the Pope is Gods replacement on earth.

" Roman Catholic religion claims that the Pope replaces Jesus Christ by being the Vicar of Christ. They claim that Vatican City is the eternal city that replaces Jerusalem. They teach that their pagan holidays replace the feast days of God and they teach that the church replaces the Israel of God."

Vicar is representative. Yes, the Church is spiritual Israel. We don't have any pagan holidays though.


6.) Prophecy of St Malachy
http://www.catholic-pages.com/grabbag/malachy.asp

"The last of these prophecies concerns the end of the world and is as follows: "In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church there will reign Peter the Roman, who will feed his flock amid many tribulations, after which the seven-hilled city will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people. The End." It has been noticed concerning Petrus Romanus, who according to St. Malachy's list is to be the last pope, that the prophecy does not say that no popes will intervene between him and his predecessor designated Gloria olivoe. It merely says that he is to be the last, so that we may suppose as many popes as we please before "Peter the Roman". Cornelius a Lapide refers to this prophecy in his commentary "On the Gospel of St. John" (C. xvi) and "On the Apocalypse" (cc. xvii-xx), and he endeavours to calculate according to it the remaining years of time"

That refers to when the End Times are, not the destruction of the Church.


7.) I'm sure you've heard of the Third vision of Fatima. The Catholic church does not want to admit this is future tense and tries to pass it off as the assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II.

I don't happen to care about the secrets of Fatima. It's private revelation and I needn't care.

[mickiel]

Be that person the pope, a christian or a sinner, anyone can be an anti-christ. Its simply a way of thinking, it is NOT an individual.

[Stephen]

Nah, just a.........ahem.......nut

:whistle:
Amen

[Queen]

Amen
:lol:

[Twilly Spree]

Ditto



Cadet, again you rule!

[Assistant Junior Deputy Janitor Analogman]

I find the "We have pictures of him kissing the Koran and receiving the Hindu mark of Shiva on his forehead by a Hindu priestess. " fact very disturbing. I can't imagine why any Christian would do that. If my pastor did that, I would leave. I am absolutely shocked right now. No, I don't hate Catholics at all. I have friends who are RC.

[Jude3b]

Dear Mickiel:

That is correct. Any person can be an "anti" Christ.

BUT, The
Papal system IS the Falling Away,THE predicted ANTI Christ system

The Bible did predict the "Falling Away" "Let no man deceive you by any means:for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God" (2 Thess. 2:3,4). By consulting the historical facts we find that these predictions were only too true. Even before the death of the apostles themselves the apostasy was beginning to work (see Rev. 2:4 to 3:16).
History shows that after the apostolic church age, a philosophising spirit took over with the higher ups in Christendom. A wild monkish superstition among the lower orders of Christendom took place, in the third century AD. Many of the clergy became corrupt, and excessively ambitious. (Marsh's Church History, p. 185).

THE PAPACY REFERRED TO IN 2 THESS. 2:3&4
The papacy is so graphically described: "That man of sin should be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God."
Romanism became the Roman Empire in the West, arrayed in a Roman Catholic (apostate Christianity) instead of a heathen garb. It is therefore described in the prophecies of the Revelation as the successor of the dragon, or heathen Rome, reigning in his stead and exercising his dominion and power.

A VIOLENT PERSECUTING POWER
The fearful persecutions of Christians by papal Rome is well known. It has been estimated that at least sixty million people suffered death by the power of papal Rome under the authority and direction of this apostate church. It is the doctrine of the church of Rome that she has the lawful right to exterminate heretics by death, and this doctrine has been confirmed again and again by the great general councils of that church, with the popes themselves in full accord and sometimes present in person. This RELIGION OF ROMANISM ALSO BOASTS THAT SHE NEVER CHANGES HER DOCTRINE. I feel certain that some of you Roman Catholics reading this would like to brand me a heretic and wish that I was dead too! Religion will do that to you!
The Scriptures point out that the number of the name of the beast - the first beast - is said to be the number of man. The Scriptures point him out particularly as the "man of sin," "the son of perdition" (2 Thess. 2:3,4). HAS THE POPE OF ROME A NAME THE LETTERS OF WHICH, USED AS NUMERALS, MAKE SIX HUNDRED AND SIXTY-SIX? YES!!!! He wears in jeweled letters upon his miter the following blasphemous inscription: VICARIUS FILII DEI - Vicar of the Son of God. Taking out of this name all the letters that the Latins used as numerals, we have just six hundred and sixty-six. U and V were both formerly used to denote five.
V..................5 F..................0
I...................1 I..................1
C..................100 L..................50
A..................0 I...................1
R..................0 I....................1
I...................1 D...................500
U...................5 E...................0
S...................0 I....................1
____________
666

Sincerely, Jude 3b

[rocketman]

I'm sorry, but anybody who uses numerology to attempt to prove something loses all credibility with me. It's like those people who tried to "prove" that there was some secret meaning in why the WTC buildings were brought down specifically on 9-11.

[Assistant Junior Deputy Janitor Analogman]

I think the Anti-Christ was Nero.

[studyhound]

[game show theme music] All right everyone It time for everyones favorite end time game, NAME THAT ANTICHRIST!!!!

Ok contestant, heres the question:

Which of the following people in history have been identified as the Antichrist?

1. Nero Caesar;
2. Frederick Hohenstaufen II (1194-1250);
3. Pope John XXII;
4. King George III;
5. Napoleon;
6. Adolph Hitler;
7. Pope Pius XII;
8. John F. Kennedy;
9. Pope John XXIII;
10. Henry Kissinger;
11. Moshe Dayan;
12. Anwar Sadat;
13. Jimmy Carter;
14. Ronald Reagan;
15. Pat Robertson;
16. King Juan Carlos (Spain);
17. Sun Myung Moon;
18. Mikhail Gorbachev;
19. Saddam Hussein;
20. Mohammar Kaddafi;

:ahem:

:studyhound:

[Assistant Junior Deputy Janitor Analogman]

21. Studyhound

[Queen]

Dear Mickiel:

That is correct. Any person can be an "anti" Christ.

BUT, The
Papal system IS the Falling Away,THE predicted ANTI Christ system

The Bible did predict the "Falling Away" "Let no man deceive you by any means:for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God" (2 Thess. 2:3,4). By consulting the historical facts we find that these predictions were only too true. Even before the death of the apostles themselves the apostasy was beginning to work (see Rev. 2:4 to 3:16).
History shows that after the apostolic church age, a philosophising spirit took over with the higher ups in Christendom. A wild monkish superstition among the lower orders of Christendom took place, in the third century AD. Many of the clergy became corrupt, and excessively ambitious. (Marsh's Church History, p. 185).

THE PAPACY REFERRED TO IN 2 THESS. 2:3&4
The papacy is so graphically described: "That man of sin should be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God."
Romanism became the Roman Empire in the West, arrayed in a Roman Catholic (apostate Christianity) instead of a heathen garb. It is therefore described in the prophecies of the Revelation as the successor of the dragon, or heathen Rome, reigning in his stead and exercising his dominion and power.

A VIOLENT PERSECUTING POWER
The fearful persecutions of Christians by papal Rome is well known. It has been estimated that at least sixty million people suffered death by the power of papal Rome under the authority and direction of this apostate church. It is the doctrine of the church of Rome that she has the lawful right to exterminate heretics by death, and this doctrine has been confirmed again and again by the great general councils of that church, with the popes themselves in full accord and sometimes present in person. This RELIGION OF ROMANISM ALSO BOASTS THAT SHE NEVER CHANGES HER DOCTRINE. I feel certain that some of you Roman Catholics reading this would like to brand me a heretic and wish that I was dead too! Religion will do that to you!
The Scriptures point out that the number of the name of the beast - the first beast - is said to be the number of man. The Scriptures point him out particularly as the "man of sin," "the son of perdition" (2 Thess. 2:3,4). HAS THE POPE OF ROME A NAME THE LETTERS OF WHICH, USED AS NUMERALS, MAKE SIX HUNDRED AND SIXTY-SIX? YES!!!! He wears in jeweled letters upon his miter the following blasphemous inscription: VICARIUS FILII DEI - Vicar of the Son of God. Taking out of this name all the letters that the Latins used as numerals, we have just six hundred and sixty-six. U and V were both formerly used to denote five.
V..................5 F..................0
I...................1 I..................1
C..................100 L..................50
A..................0 I...................1
R..................0 I....................1
I...................1 D...................500
U...................5 E...................0
S...................0 I....................1
____________
666

Sincerely, Jude 3b


Oh MY.........666? Help! Run! We must find an exorcist......:doh:


Sorry Jude, never believed in that kind of thingy. :hug:

Lots of love and sunshine,
Queen :Q:

[Rose Kendall]

Romans 8:7 says that our "natural mind" HATES GOD. Maybe we are the antichrist. Isn't anything antichristian stuff that is anti-christ? "instead of Christ". It could be that when we do things in our own strength, by our own reasoning and intellect, that we show the "mark" - head (reasoning) and hands (strength). Look at Goliath's measurements, by the way - 666.

Rose

[Rose Kendall]

I agree. Look in the mirror if you want to see antichristian stuff - See romans 8:7. Or even chapter 7 of Romans.

[Rose Kendall]

I thought preterists believed that the NT was all written before 70 AD and had ALREADY happened?

Rose

[Rose Kendall]

The "falling away" is when christians become RELIGIOUS, reducing their connection with God to a scrupulously kept list of rules. They "fell away" from their "first love".

Blessings on you as you add 2+2 with Scripture,

Rose

[Jude3b]

Hi Rose: I feel like I have at least one friend on this theologyweb now. They there Catolics likes to gang up on me, if you know whats I mean! Thanks for your comments, Jude 3b

[spl_cadet]

Hi Rose: I feel like I have at least one friend on this theologyweb now. They there Catolics likes to gang up on me, if you know whats I mean! Thanks for your comments, Jude 3b

We need the humor.

[Twilly Spree]

I like the thrill of it all personally. Woosh!

[kofh2u]

[QUOTE=Jude3b]
No way, judes... the Pope is Abaddon in the Hebrew and Apollo in the Greek.

To convincingly identify the man in Rev 13 you Must fill in all the spaces, and you must be wise enough to know the Gematria of the Hebrew scribes, the Sopherim!

Try this ID out:

Rev. 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw THE GOLDEN BULL rise up out of the sea, having seven heads, those MAJOR EMPIRES of WESTERN CULTURE, and ten horns, EACH A SEQUENCE OF EUROPEAN LEADERSHIP WHICH FOLLOWED, and upon his horns ten crowns OF NATIONAL ORIGIN, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy, "MAMMON, GOD OF GOLD."

Rev. 13:2 And THE GOLDEN BULL which I saw was like unto a leopard, PERSIA, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, MEDE, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion, BABYLON: and the dragon, SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY, gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

Rev. 13:3 And I saw one of his heads, ROME, as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the (TENTH HORN) beast, NAZI GERMANY.

Rev. 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon, SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY, which gave power unto the beast, EMPIRE: and they worshipped the beast, NAZI GERMANY, saying, Who is like unto the beast, THE REVIVED ROMAN EMPIRE OF TWELVE NATIONS, who is able to make war with him?

Rev. 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth, DER FUHRER, speakingmgreat things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months, 1942-45.

Rev. 13:6 And he, HITLER, opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle OF THE JEWS, and them that dwell in heaven.

Rev. 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them, IMPRISIONING THE VATICAN: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations; GERMANY, AUSTRIA, POLAND, FRANCE, DENMARK, NETHERLANDS, ...

Rev. 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, DER
FUHRER, whose names are not written in the book of life, THE SCRIPTURES OF THE JEWS, and of the Lamb, slain from the foundation of the world.

Rev. 13:9 If any man have an ear, let him hear. WORLD WAR TWO IS COMING!

Rev. 13:10 He that leadeth into captivity, GERMANY, shall go into
captivity, OCCUPATION, 1945: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

Rev. 13:11 And I beheld another beast, coming up out of the earth; and he, HITLER, had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon,
SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY.

Rev. 13:12 And he, HITLER, exerciseth all the power of the first
beast, INDUSTRIALIZED GERMANY, before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, A REVIVED ROMAN EMPIRE (or Western Europe), whose deadly wound of CHRISTIAN CONVERSION was healed AND THE THOUSAND YEAR REIGN OF CHRIST, (The Dark Ages), HAD ENDED, WITH THE RENAISANNCE.

Rev. 13:13 And he, IN HIS TECHNOLOGY, doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,

Rev. 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast, EMPIRE; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image, A SWASTIKA, to the beast, THE FATHERLAND, which had the wound by a sword FROM THE MOUTH OF CHRIST, and did live.

Rev. 13:15 And he, SCIENCE/TECHNOLOGY, had power to give life, IN THE CAPACITY OF HITLER, unto the image of the beast, THE SWASTIKA, that the image of the beast should both speak, "SIEG HEIL," and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

Rev. 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark OF THE SWASTIKA IN A SALUTE OF "SIEG HEIL" in their right hand, or in THE ENSIGNIA OF THE CAPS OF their foreheads:

Rev. 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark OF THE SWASTIKA, or the name of thembeast, FATHERLAND, or the number of his name, NINE, 9 (or 4).

Rev. 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
ANSWER: 6+6+6 = 1+8 = 9, ACCORDING TO THE GEMATRIA OF THE HEBREW SOPHERIM, BUT IN THE HEBREW (without vowels) HTLR IS 616 = 6+1+6 = 1+3 = 4 .

[John Reece]

We need the humor.

:yes:

[kofh2u]

hahaha...
Right on, what will be the quaifiers for understanding the ID of this mysterious man, 666? Just filling in the mysterious symbolism of one chapter, 13, that wouldn't do. There are 21 more. The symbolic blanks there, in them all, would need be contextually supportive of whatever one says in Revelation, chapter i3.

Does scriptre make a fool of us? I mean, with all the guesses down through tge ages, yes, this puzzle has had popular appeal and served as a great drawing card for attention, guving the Word much opportunity to reach people perhaps otherwise not drawn yo God.

But, is it a cruel execuse in futility?

Are there guide lines by which we can be certain of tge answer, at least for tge Christian fsithful? What would the key to this Gordian Knot demand as evidence of THE proof?

[Jude3b]

The true Vicars of Christ on earth - the Word and Spirit of God - have been set aside, and the papal system has been set up as an "anti" Christ system.
That is not to say that some worshipers of Protestant images also receive the number of this name - six hundred and sixty-six. The name is that of "Vicar of the Son of God." In a large part Protestantism has also set aside the Word and Spirit of God and replaced them with conferences of men and creeds.
Sincerely, Jude 3b

[John Reece]

I have studied John Paul II for decades. He is not an antichrist, in any sense of the word.

[Jude3b]

Pope is an Antichrist
The Greek word (anti) in scripture most nearly denotes something that is "in place of" another thing. The root meaning is, "instead of" or "in place of." It is not the original but a substitution, not Christ but a substitute Christ. Instead of Christ a false Christ an Antichrist.
In 2 Thess 2:3-12 Christ is substituted, as Pope has taken the position of Jesus Christ. When Pope Pius IX was Archbishop of Venice, he stated: 'the pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ Himself, hidden under the veil of the flesh. Does the pope speak? It is Jesus Christ who speaks. Does the pope accord a favour or pronounce an anathema? It is Jesus Christ who accords the favour or pronounces that anathema. So that when the pope speaks we have no business to examine.'
Roman Catholicism believes it is the one true church, as the scripture points out, the Antichrist, sitting in the temple of God and proclaiming to be God. Some examples of how the Pope fits into this category: 'Our Most Holy Lord' - Council of Trent, 1545. Christ alone is Lord. Revelation 17:14.
Christ taught his followers to pray to God through Him. The Pope teaches his followers to pray to the Virgin Mary.
Sincerely, Jude 3b

[kofh2u]

And where does St. Malachy predict the destruction of the Church?



You are correct, the Pope doesn't deny Christ... quite tge opposite. "Anti-" defacto... antiChrist.

Note, however, that church attendance in Western Europe is @ 20%.

Rev. 2:18 And unto the social psychic archetype of our human
ANIMA/Animus in the Time of Universal Catholicism write; These things saith the conscious CONSCIENCE, who sees the seven unconscious psychic apparati which have been developed in the furnace of Evolution;


(Yes, in 1998 the Pope acknowledged that Darwinism is too well supported in the accumulated scientific knowledge for the Church to oppose tte theory.)

Rev. 2:19 I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and
thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the first.

(Catholicism passes! That is, the Great White Throne Judgement as per the basic requirement, AND here, in Revelation 2:19, the RCC has a scripturally confirmed grade of A-, at least. ) Matthew 25:19

Rev. 2:20 Notwithstanding, I have a few things against thee, because thou tolerate a sexual deviant sect, which calleth herself a proclaimer of the doctrine of celibacy, to teach and to seduce my congregators to accept an institutionalized enculturation, and to engage in pedophilia and sodomies.

[ratioann]

thats odd, thats not what my bibles say...

Revelation 2
20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. KJV

Revelation 2:20
Nevertheless I have a few things against you, because you allow that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. NKJV

What version do you have?

But anyways..
I do think the pope is an antichrist, or at least paving the way for THE antichrist. The thought that mary may be named Co-Redemptrix by this pope is a concern. Wouldn't that be like denying Christ as the only way to heaven? I certainly think it, at least opens the doors to the possibilty. The eucharist is another thing I really dislike about catholism...creeps me out.

http://www.harpazo.net/Queen.html

http://www.harpazo.net/Eucharist.html

http://www.harpazo.net/antichrist.html

I have found these articles to be interesting.

[kofh2u]

thats odd, thats not what my bibles say...

Revelation 2
20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. KJV

Revelation 2:20
Nevertheless I have a few things against you, because you allow that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. NKJV

What version do you have?

I am using the Freudian Bible Translation. It is great.

It starts the interpretation of scripture with just one basic premise to guide all word derivations and connotation selections. That premise is that scripture concerns human behavior.

So, the number seven comes up so often because there are seven psychic factors driving our actions.

These sources of motivation behind our behavior are called evil, as they apparently have long been. They are:

Satan = Libido
Lucifer = Id
Baalzebub = Self
Mammon = Ego
False Prophet = Superego
False Shepherd = Harmony Principle
Devil = Anima/animus

And, of course,
The Holy Spirit = Conscience

[ratioann]

very weird
I can't even think of how to respond to that.
Hey, your not playing with me 'cause I'm newb are you?

[Twilly Spree]

(Yes, in 1998 the Pope acknowledged that Darwinism is too well supported in the accumulated scientific knowledge for the Church to oppose tte theory.)

The Catholic Church does not support Darwinism but Evolution. There is a difference. Let me pull up that article again....

http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Issues/Pope-and-Evolution/pope-and-evolution.html

There we go. Get your facts straight chief.

[kofh2u]

Romans 8:7 says that our "natural mind" HATES GOD. Maybe we are the antichrist. Isn't anything antichristian stuff that is anti-christ? "instead of Christ". It could be that when we do things in our own strength, by our own reasoning and intellect, that we show the "mark" - head (reasoning) and hands (strength). Look at Goliath's measurements, by the way - 666.

Rose


Good guess, rose.

We might note too that the present number, thd]e wotld population is @ 6.66 billion.

[Bib Lit Major]

Scripturally, an antichrist is someone who denies that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:22), that he is the Son of God (as 2:23 implies), that he came in the flesh (4:2; 2 John 7). In fact, there are many antichrists (2:18), because they hold to these teachings. Thus, I don't think the pope matches any of the biblical descriptions of an antichrist.

[Jude3b]

Scripturally, an antichrist is someone who denies that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:22), that he is the Son of God (as 2:23 implies), that he came in the flesh (4:2; 2 John 7). In fact, there are many antichrists (2:18), because they hold to these teachings. Thus, I don't think the pope matches any of the biblical descriptions of an antichrist.

The Papal system declares that salvation is in the Roman Catholic church alone. The Word of God declares that salvation is in Christ alone. An "anti" - Christ is someone who denies that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah - only all sufficient Savior). The greek word "anti" in scripture means "in place of" and as we see in 2 Thess. 2:3-12, Christ is substituted, as Pope has taken the position of Jesus Christ.

[Bib Lit Major]

The Papal system declares that salvation is in the Roman Catholic church alone. The Word of God declares that salvation is in Christ alone.

I'm sure its not quite that simple, but even if it were, it wouldn't mean the RCC/Pope is an antichrist according to Scripture, even if it is wrong theology, according to the biblical definition.

An "anti" - Christ is someone who denies that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah - only all sufficient Savior).

Messiah doesn't mean "only all sufficient Savior." It means "annointed one." In fact, the same term is used in reference to priests, prophets, and kings. While I agree that Christ is the "only all sufficient Savior," that is not what 1 John is talking about. John is dealing with a type of (proto-?)Gnostic schism, where a group of teachers are teaching that the man Jesus was not the Christ, but that the Christ perhaps dwelled in Him prior to the Crucifxtion. At that point, the Christ abandoned the man Jesus, since the Christ could not suffer death, since matter is evil, and death is a property of matter, in the idea of Gnostic systems. Thus, the denial of Jesus as the Christ is denying that the Christ would take on "evil" human flesh and die.

The greek word "anti" in scripture means "in place of" and as we see in 2 Thess. 2:3-12, Christ is substituted, as Pope has taken the position of Jesus Christ.

While the preposition anti does mean "in place of" that is not what it always means when it is prefixed to another word. Also, there is no clear reference to the "man of lawlessness" as the "antichrist" in your passage that you cited. In fact, the only occurence of anti in that passage is on the word antikeimenos, which means "the one who opposes" in v. 4.

Thus, biblically, I don't think John had the papal system in mind, and Paul doesn't even use the term "antichrist." Thus, unless you can show a clear Gnostic doctrine of Christ in the RCC, I don't think you can use the term "antichrist" to describe it, without changing the criterion of what an antichrist is to something that was not originally what they thought of.

[Jude3b]

I commend you, a very intelligent post. But lets not complicate the question, "Is the pope an antiChrist?" Despite your beautiful explanation of greek words, etc., it is a fact that the papacy stands in place of. It also leads a substitution, not the original (leading Roman Catholicism, instead of the church of God).

Have you ever read any of the writings of Martin Luther?

It is interesting to see what he had to say about the popes:

"Whence comes it that the popes pretend 'tis they who form the church, when, all the while, they are bitter enemies of the church, and have no knowledge, certainly no comprehension, of the Holy Gospel? Pope, cardinals, bishops, not a soul of them has read the Bible; 'tis a book unkown to them. They are a pack of guzzling, stuffing wretches, rich, wallowing in wealth and laziness, resting secure in their power, and never, for a moment, thinking of accomplishing God's will. Seeing the pope is antichrist I believe him to be a devil incarnate. Like as Christ is true and natural God and man, so is antichrist a living devil. It is true, too, what they say of the pope, that he is a terrestrial god, - for he is neither a real god nor a real man, but of the two natures mingled together. He names himself an earthly God, as though, the only true and Almighty God were not on earth! Truly, the pope's kingdom is a horrible outrage against the power of God and against mankind; an abomination of desolation, which stands in the holy place."

[Jude3b]

The Catholic Church does not support Darwinism but Evolution. There is a difference. Let me pull up that article again....

http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Issues/Pope-and-Evolution/pope-and-evolution.html

There we go. Get your facts straight chief.

This Roman Catholic church believing in Evolution is another proof that it is an antichrist. The theory of Evolution opposes Biblical facts about ages, about origins. It challenges the Bible's place in people's lives. By Roman Catholicism accepting Evolution as true, it causes people to question the truth of the Word of God and if there is even a God.


With the Bible no longer a moral compass for our life, people begin to accept the lies and theories of the origin of man, species, etc.

Whenever you discard the Bible then the natural consequences is people are going to make their own rules, they're going to have their own morals.

Whenever you determine in yourself what's right and what's wrong for you, then you're making yourself your own god. You become an anti-christ, just like Romanism has. Rome places tradition and ideas of sinful fallible men over the Word of God. It has become an anti-christ.

[Twilly Spree]

Do you ever read the articles? Or just make assumptions.

[Jude3b]

Do you ever read the articles? Or just make assumptions.

Yes, "The Pope believes in Evolution." I believe in entropy.

The Word of God states we were created by Almighty God.

[spl_cadet]

Yes, "The Pope believes in Evolution." I believe in entropy.

The Word of God states we were created by Almighty God.

And that is a dogma of the Church.

[Twilly Spree]

I'm not even going to bother anymore....write all you want Jude.

[Jude3b]

And that is a dogma of the Church.

What is a dogma of what church? Evolution is certainly not a dogma of the church of God, the body of Christ.

[Jude3b]

The pope claims to be the supreme head of the church, even, as in the case of Pope Innocent, denominating himself the one before whom every knee must bow, of things in heaven, and things on the earth and things under the earth. He claims power over the souls of all men on earth and even after their departure from earth. If this is not blasphemy against God, his tabernacle, or church, and 'them that dwell in heaven," then I am wholly unable to imagine what would fulfil the prediction. Among the blasphemous titles assumed are these: Lord God the Pope, King of the World, Holy Father, King of Kings, and Lord of Lord, Vicegerent of the Son of God. He claims infallibility (which was acknowledged by the General Council of 1870), and he has claimed such for ages. Further, he claims power to dispense with God's laws, to forgive sins, to release from purgatory, to damn, and to save.
Yes, the papacy is an AntiChrist.

[Jude3b]

The pope claims to be the supreme head of the church, even, as in the case of Pope Innocent, denominating himself the one before whom every knee must bow, of things in heaven, and things on the earth and things under the earth. He claims power over the souls of all men on earth and even after their departure from earth. If this is not blasphemy against God, his tabernacle, or church, and 'them that dwell in heaven," then I am wholly unable to imagine what would fulfil the prediction. Among the blasphemous titles assumed are these: Lord God the Pope, King of the World, Holy Father, King of Kings, and Lord of Lord, Vicegerent of the Son of God. He claims infallibility (which was acknowledged by the General Council of 1870), and he has claimed such for ages. Further, he claims power to dispense with God's laws, to forgive sins, to release from purgatory, to damn, and to save.
Yes, the papacy is an AntiChrist.

Please don't let the devil deceive you any longer. He is your real enemy and he is using the Roman Catholic religion, and most other religions as well to keep you away from Jesus Christ. Please don't let him keep you away any longer. Turn to Jesus today. He is waiting to set you free.

"Trust in the LORD (not religion) with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding (study and believe the Word of God). In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." (Proverbs 3:5-6)

[GoBahnsen]

Be that person the pope, a christian or a sinner, anyone can be an anti-christ. Its simply a way of thinking, it is NOT an individual.Nicely stated mickiel.

[Jude3b]

Please don't let the devil deceive you any longer. He is your real enemy and he is using the Roman Catholic religion, and most other religions as well to keep you away from Jesus Christ. Please don't let him keep you away any longer. Turn to Jesus today. He is waiting to set you free.

"Trust in the LORD (not religion) with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding (study and believe the Word of God). In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths." (Proverbs 3:5-6)

Roman Catholics not only receive the name of the beast, but also receive the "number of his name." When we enter the Romish hierarchy and search for a man the number of whose name will be six hundred and sixty-six, where should we go more approriately than to the pope himself, its authorized head? The Scriptures point him out particularly as the "man of sin," "the son of perdition" (2 Thess. 2: 3,4). Has the pope of Rome a name the letters of which, used as numerals, make six hundred and sixty-six? Yes. He wears in jeweled letters upon his miter the following blasphemous inscription: Vicarius Filii Dei - Vicar of the Son of God. Taking out of this name all the letters that the Latins used as numerals, we have just six hundred and sixty-six 666!

[kofh2u]

Roman Catholics not only receive the name of the beast, but also receive the "number of his name." When we enter the Romish hierarchy and search for a man the number of whose name will be six hundred and sixty-six, where should we go more approriately than to the pope himself, its authorized head? The Scriptures point him out particularly as the "man of sin," "the son of perdition" (2 Thess. 2: 3,4). Has the pope of Rome a name the letters of which, used as numerals, make six hundred and sixty-six? Yes. He wears in jeweled letters upon his miter the following blasphemous inscription: Vicarius Filii Dei - Vicar of the Son of God. Taking out of this name all the letters that the Latins used as numerals, we have just six hundred and sixty-six 666!


Again you ignor all the other items besides 666 needed to ID this figure which Revelation 13 challanges us to contemplate in wisdom. It is not wise just to go with a manipulated 666, and a history of middle age papal misbehaviors.

I also recommend you consider these identifying possibilities:

Rev. 9:10 And they had tails (from millennia long past) like unto
scorpions (of chastisement), and there were (retributions as if) stings in their tails (dragging past teachings from 32AD from one generation into the next): and their power was to hurt (organized Pagan religions) five months, ((@ 150 years: 313AD, The Edict of Toleration by Constantine, to the Fall of The Roman Empire, 475AD).

Rev. 9:11 And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit (of time), whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, (Destroyer), but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon, (or Christian Ruler, Pope).

[Jude3b]

Again you ignor all the other items besides 666 needed to ID this figure which Revelation 13 challanges us to contemplate in wisdom. It is not wise just to go with a manipulated 666, and a history of middle age papal misbehaviors.

I also recommend you consider these identifying possibilities:

Rev. 9:10 And they had tails (from millennia long past) like unto
scorpions (of chastisement), and there were (retributions as if) stings in their tails (dragging past teachings from 32AD from one generation into the next): and their power was to hurt (organized Pagan religions) five months, ((@ 150 years: 313AD, The Edict of Toleration by Constantine, to the Fall of The Roman Empire, 475AD).

Rev. 9:11 And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit (of time), whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, (Destroyer), but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon, (or Christian Ruler, Pope).

Rev. 9:10 & 11, do not negate the papacy being identified with 666.

Rev. 9:10: Their tails like scorpions, containing stings with which to "hurt men" - operating in the religious world - symbolize their position as propagators of a false faith. Thus they are set forth in their two fold character - as invinciple warriors and as the zealous professors of a delusion, whose sting was like that of a scorpion when he strikes a man.

Rev. 9:11: The following fact of history explains this verse- "The Saracens had their Caliphs, the successors of Mohammed, who united in themselves the supreme civil, military and ecclesiastical powers. They were the high priests of their religion, the commanders of their armies, and the emperors of the nation. This king over them signifies a succession of rulers, and they are well described as "the angel of the bottomless pit," for that is the very place where the delusion is said to have originated. Mahomet, as a falled star, opened the pit and let out the smoke, and his successors, who grasped his power and authority, are fitly characterized as angels from the same place, bearing the name Abaddon or Apollyon, which terms both signify Destroyer.

[Good News Man]

Rev. 9:10 & 11, do not negate the papacy being identified with 666.

Rev. 9:10: Their tails like scorpions, containing stings with which to "hurt men" - operating in the religious world - symbolize their position as propagators of a false faith. Thus they are set forth in their two fold character - as invinciple warriors and as the zealous professors of a delusion, whose sting was like that of a scorpion when he strikes a man.

Rev. 9:11: The following fact of history explains this verse- "The Saracens had their Caliphs, the successors of Mohammed, who united in themselves the supreme civil, military and ecclesiastical powers. They were the high priests of their religion, the commanders of their armies, and the emperors of the nation. This king over them signifies a succession of rulers, and they are well described as "the angel of the bottomless pit," for that is the very place where the delusion is said to have originated. Mahomet, as a falled star, opened the pit and let out the smoke, and his successors, who grasped his power and authority, are fitly characterized as angels from the same place, bearing the name Abaddon or Apollyon, which terms both signify Destroyer.



QUESTION:

Are you guys sure that Muhammad is not the actual 666?

[Magister Matt]

QUESTION:

Are you guys sure that Muhammad is not the actual 666?
Jude's eschatology seems to be very similar if not the same as Martin Luther's view called Historicism.

I find historicism to be interesting and there is some useful information regarding this view on www.historicist.com and www.historicism.com, which shed more light on why people believe this stuff (i.e; Pope to be the antichrist or at least part of the antichrist's empire). I suggest people read it.

[brother vinny]

Jude's eschatology seems to be very similar if not the same as Martin Luther's view called Historicism.

Not just Luther, but also John Calvin's, Jonathan Edwards', Charles Spurgeon's, etc.

[Good News Man]

Jude's eschatology seems to be very similar if not the same as Martin Luther's view called Historicism.

I find historicism to be interesting and there is some useful information regarding this view on www.historicist.com and www.historicism.com, which shed more light on why people believe this stuff (i.e; Pope to be the antichrist or at least part of the antichrist's empire). I suggest people read it.



Hi Jesus Believe Me: Greetings in the Precious name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Grace and Peace unto you.


THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THOSE WEB ADDRESSES. There is some interesting things there.

Grow in Grace,

Good News Man

[David_A_Reed]

Not just Luther, but also John Calvin's, Jonathan Edwards', Charles Spurgeon's, etc.Yes, Calvin and Luther saw the Antichrist as both the papacy and Islam: The papacy was the Western Antichrist and Islam the Eastern Antichrist. Calvin refered to them as the two "horns" and Luther called them the two "legs" of the Antichrist. (Luther's Works, Weimer ed., 53, 394f)

"Lyke as Mahomet saith ty his Alcoran is ye soveraine wisdome, so saith the Pope of his owne decrees: For they be the two hornes of Antichrist."
—John Calvin
The Sermons of M. John Calvin upon the Fifth Booke of Moses called Deuteronomie, translated by Arthur Golding, first published in London, 1583, from a facsimile reprint by Banner of Truth Trust, 1987.

"the Pope is the spirit of antichrist, and the Turk is the flesh of antichrist. They help each other in their murderous work. The latter slaughters bodily by the sword; and the former spiritually by doctrine."
—Martin Luther, Tischreden, Weimer ed., 1, No. 330

"what is the Pope doing? He is sitting not in the natural temple or God's house, but in the spiritual, in the new and living temple of which Paul says: 'If any man destroyeth the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are,' I Cor. 3, 16-17. ... Thus you see whether the Pope is not the greatest arch-abomination of all abominations, to whom Christ and Daniel refer; and the true Antichrist, of whom it is written that he sitteth in the temple of God, among the people, where Christ is named and where his kingdom, spirit, baptism, Word and faith should be...."
—Martin Luther, "Sermon for the Twenty-Fifth Sunday after Trinity; Matthew 24:15-28"
from his Church Postil, first published in 1525
available online at http://www.orlutheran.com/mlsemt2415.html

Besides Luther and Calvin, others expressing similar views include Roger Williams (the first Baptist pastor in America), John Knox (early Scottish Presbyterian), Cotton Mather (a leader of Congregationalists in the American colonies), John Wesley (Methodist), John Wycliffe (Bible translator), John Huss (martyred by the Inquisition), and the 1646 Westminster Confession of Faith.

As a result, this was the prevalent thinking of Bible believers from before the Reformation until the late 1800's or early 1900's. If many in the churches today have left behind this understanding, guess who is more likely to be right!

David

[RCNicholas]

Colossians 1:18 states that "Christ is the head of the Church," yet Romanism teaches that the Pope is the Head of the Church. Doesn't that make the Pope an Antichrist???
Sincerely, Jude 3bJust a thought, but do you do anything on these forums but spout anti-Catholic rhetoric?? For goodness sake, I haven't read a single thread that you've posted in where you haven't somehow tried to bash Catholicism: get a new hobby. The Catholic Church plainly teaches that Christ is the head of the Church. The Pope is the visible representative of Christ's authority on Earth.

[Good News Man]

Yes, Calvin and Luther saw the Antichrist as both the papacy and Islam: The papacy was the Western Antichrist and Islam the Eastern Antichrist. Calvin refered to them as the two "horns" and Luther called them the two "legs" of the Antichrist. (Luther's Works, Weimer ed., 53, 394f)

"Lyke as Mahomet saith ty his Alcoran is ye soveraine wisdome, so saith the Pope of his owne decrees: For they be the two hornes of Antichrist."
—John Calvin
The Sermons of M. John Calvin upon the Fifth Booke of Moses called Deuteronomie, translated by Arthur Golding, first published in London, 1583, from a facsimile reprint by Banner of Truth Trust, 1987.

"the Pope is the spirit of antichrist, and the Turk is the flesh of antichrist. They help each other in their murderous work. The latter slaughters bodily by the sword; and the former spiritually by doctrine."
—Martin Luther, Tischreden, Weimer ed., 1, No. 330

"what is the Pope doing? He is sitting not in the natural temple or God's house, but in the spiritual, in the new and living temple of which Paul says: 'If any man destroyeth the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are,' I Cor. 3, 16-17. ... Thus you see whether the Pope is not the greatest arch-abomination of all abominations, to whom Christ and Daniel refer; and the true Antichrist, of whom it is written that he sitteth in the temple of God, among the people, where Christ is named and where his kingdom, spirit, baptism, Word and faith should be...."
—Martin Luther, "Sermon for the Twenty-Fifth Sunday after Trinity; Matthew 24:15-28"
from his Church Postil, first published in 1525
available online at http://www.orlutheran.com/mlsemt2415.html

Besides Luther and Calvin, others expressing similar views include Roger Williams (the first Baptist pastor in America), John Knox (early Scottish Presbyterian), Cotton Mather (a leader of Congregationalists in the American colonies), John Wesley (Methodist), John Wycliffe (Bible translator), John Huss (martyred by the Inquisition), and the 1646 Westminster Confession of Faith.

As a result, this was the prevalent thinking of Bible believers from before the Reformation until the late 1800's or early 1900's. If many in the churches today have left behind this understanding, guess who is more likely to be right!

David



Hi David:

I don't know "who is more likely to be right!" Please tell me. I find this post very interesting and I would like to learn more about this subject.

Grow in Grace,

Good News Man

[David_A_Reed]

Hi David:

I don't know "who is more likely to be right!" Please tell me. I find this post very interesting and I would like to learn more about this subject.

Grow in Grace,

Good News ManFor a thousand years or more, Bible believers saw the papacy and Islam as antichrists. Then along came the popularity of Dispensationalism, and the long-held understandings of prophecy were thrown out the window.

So, today we still have the Pope sitting in God's place in the spiritual temple (the Church), and Islam sitting in God's place on Temple Mount, while professed Christians ignore both and keep watching for a fictional Nicolae Carpathia (as in the LEFT BEHIND novels) to take over the United Nations and rebuild the Jewish Temple.

For more information on the views held by Protestants before Dispensationalism swept through the churches a mere hundred years ago, see some of my web sites linked below in my signature, as well as http://www.Historicism.com (owned by Joe Haynes who often posts here).

David

[spauline]

Hi, I'm Catholic, and I have my own take on the Seal and Mark thing that includes the False Prophet. In short, I see the journey of the trumpets from the Seal to the Mark as the process of spiritual digression from full Catholicisim to full Apostasy. In particular, I see the first and second great woes as Protestantism and the Enlightenment, and of course the final woe is the modern apostasy in atheistic materialism and relativistic hedonistic materialism.


I have a link if anybody wants it.
but here's a taste on the false prophet:

but first, it might help to read this, Five Loaves and Two Fish: The Seven Sacraments? (http://www.catholicmeditations.org/subSites/apocalypse/sacraments.php), a treatise that conjectures the five loaves and two fish are a symbol of the seven sacraments, and that the five and two partitioning is due to the fact that attack on the Eucharist causes a rift in the body of Christ such that the separating heretics retain only "two" sacraments, Baptism and Marriage. so here's the big quote:



well, anyway, i've gotta move on. In the final woe, we see the presence of the false prophet who has "two horns, like a Lamb (who, on the other hand, has seven)". Here I conjecture a final application of the"five loaves and two fish" and the "two is a symbol of heresy" idea: the FP has "two horns", the Lamb of which has "seven". And, of course, Christ has seven "eyes". Now i realize there's multilayered symbolism in Revelation, and so seven can just be the number of "perfection or completeness." OK, fine. Hence, Christ has the "complete perfect vision", knowing all things, all truths, and, as I have heard horns can be symbols of power, He has the perfect, complete Redemptive "power". But, are there not also seven sacraments, and are not the sacraments the primary power of the Redemption in terms of the assistance of our wills?

Now, the false prophet could not literally have two sacraments, for in its symbolism of apostate ideologies that deceive man, he is completely devoid of any spiritual goodness, but JPII, who, on one occasion, spoke of the FP as, on one level, materialism, speaks of the devil as plagairizing the sacraments, such as how the devil plagairizes Marriage and the Eucharist with fornication and gluttony/drunkenness. So I suggest something similar: for just as Christ's full Redemptive power through sanctifying grace finds its greatest expression in the "seven" sacraments, so, the false prophet, as the ultimate heresy ["2 horns"], speaks of a deceptive "salvation" and fulfillment in a total mockery and diabolical twisting of the "2" sacraments of heresy, Baptism and Marriage.

Now, note, Baptism and Marriage most aptly express the two great relationships that we have to God as Christians: we are the children of the Father, and we are [collectively] the spouse of Christ. Note also that Baptism establishes this spiritual "childhood" in the sense of total dependence upon a loving God who must help us, teach us, guide us, etc. Also, in Baptism, we receive already of the fruits of the Spirits and an initial infusion of the virtues and fruits of holiness, all of which are intended to nourish us to do what the meaning of our existence is: to offer ourselves totally to others and God in love and self-giving and sacrificing. This most adequately also expresses the meaning and purpose of marriage, which ultimately points toward unity with God, a deep and unfathomable immersion in ultimate, infinite self-giving love and truth.

Hence, the FP, as apostate worldliness, sin, and materialism, twists these realities diabolically into their evil counterparts. Hence, just as Baptism inaugurates one on the journey of salvation and makes one a child of God, being totally dependent on his Love, Help and Truth, so the counterfeit of Baptism makes one a child of the devil, bearing the imprint of the opposite of love and dependence: selfish ambition and immoral passions and the ultimate INdepedence, that is, like the devil, the total negation of one's dependence upon God, believing oneself to be "one's own god," in ultimate pride, "knowing good and evil", independent not only of Christ, His Church, His Scripture, but even of ANY religion, and believing that, just as Baptism points us to the only thing that can ultimately fulfill us [God], that the material creation alone will suffice, that it will sustain us and satisfy us.

Also, for whereas Christian Marriage ultimately speaks of self-less sacrificial, totally-self-giving love, calling one to be in union not merely in some physical sense, but, ultimately, spiritually with the other, so the FP's counterfeit of marriage is cheap, lustful, superfiicial fornication with the world, believing that one can ultimately be fulfilled by the selfish and vain aspirations of prideful worldly and superficial pursuits, seeking to "get" and "take" pleasures and recognitions for oneself, instead of giving and offering oneself in love.

we might also then draw the contrast between the "woman" and the "whore", that is, between Christ's Spouse, the woman of Revelation 12, the Chuch, and the "Whore of Babylon", the unfaithful fornicater who joins herself to the "world", that is, the enemy of Christ.

[spauline]

OK, I'll post the section on Protestantism, too, seeing as it is relevant (Catholics can see meanings that favor Church history, too! :smile: )

On the first great woe:

(ps, I'm not saying Protestants are fully to blame, for the preceding trumpet woudl seem to be the MORAL darkening of the Catholic clergy, the "scandal" of which Christ speaks of in Matthew 24 that leads to hatred, betrayal, false prophets, etc.)


So, before I begin, I now refer one to the above article that i have posted before that argues that the Five loaves and two fish, mentioned in all four Gospels, are a metaphor for the seven sacraments and that the partitioning is due to how affronts to the Eucharist and Christian unity intrinsically partition the sacraments into one group of five and one group of two, namely, the two fish are the two remaining sacraments (Baptism and Marriage) that heretics retain after their separation, appropriately coming from the "sea", where one is tossed to and fro (see James? ) by every "wave of doctrine", as opposed to the five loaves which require the "earth", or foundation of truth (1 Tim 3:15), the Magisterium, or at least the episcopate. Anyway, the central thesis is that 2 becomes a biblical symbol of heresy and how to apply this to the numbers specifically mentioned in the three great woes, which also involve "five" months, "two" [myriads of myriads ] (20,000 X 10,000) and "two" horns [of the False Prophet].
So now, just a cursory analysis of the three great woes is as follows. In the first great woe, the fifth trumpet, the persons harmed do not have the "Seal of God" in their forehead, however, they do not absolutely "die" from the infliction. They are rather tortured towards death for "five months". Hence, as Fr. Kramer in Tan's the Book of Destiny, argues that the first great woe is in fact the Protestant Rebellion (for obvious reaosns, for certainly this devastating and massively confusing disruption of Christian unity was certainly a primary cause of what is the beginning of the apostasy from Catholic Christendom), I conjecture the meaning here is appropriate, for, even though Protestantism is a rebellion against Catholicism, nevertheless, presuming a particular individual harmed in this manner is only a material heretic, they do not "die" spiritually, for, as they retain faith in a supernatural redeeeming and revealing God, even in Christ, it is assumed that they retain "supernatural" life, that is, sanctifiying grace. However, as discussed, the rift is so detrimental, that the individual and associated communities forfeit "five" sacraments, hence, providing such a great loss of supernatural life, they just barely avoid [spiritual] "death", not to mention that the heretical leaders "torture" their consciences, forcing them to have to try to find the truth of how to avoid hell by studying Scipture alone.

(As a side note, I recall Steve Ray recounting of how when he came to Chirst early in life, he felt an enormous burden on his shoulders, namely, to derive all truth from Scipture alone. I can speak personally of the terror of Protestantism, for those of you who don't know my story, I literally became terribly mentally ill in pursuit of religion when I didn't trust the Catholic Church. It was utterly terrifying to try to figure out what I had to do to "get saved" and avoid eternal damnation when all I have is the Bible, which is an infinitely scary book that speaks and teaches of hell far more than of heaven. Now I thank Jesus with all my heart that I don't have to "derive" all truth, I just listen to my Mother, the Church. Praise God. If you are interested in more of my story, click here.)

[Ambassador]

For a thousand years or more, Bible believers saw the papacy and Islam as antichrists. Then along came the popularity of Dispensationalism, and the long-held understandings of prophecy were thrown out the window.

So, today we still have the Pope sitting in God's place in the spiritual temple (the Church), and Islam sitting in God's place on Temple Mount, while professed Christians ignore both and keep watching for a fictional Nicolae Carpathia (as in the LEFT BEHIND novels) to take over the United Nations and rebuild the Jewish Temple.

For more information on the views held by Protestants before Dispensationalism swept through the churches a mere hundred years ago, see some of my web sites linked below in my signature, as well as http://www.Historicism.com (owned by Joe Haynes who often posts here).

David


David, I have also been very concerned about the imaginative and fanciful teachings of pre-mil dispensationalism. It's frustrating. Why does the New Testament church have to make the same mistake that the Jewish nation made - concerning Messiah! Thank you for sharing the www.Historicism.com web address. I will save it in favorites.

Have a Happy Thanksgiving, Ambassador

[RCNicholas]

[QUOTE=David_A_Reed]For a thousand years or more, Bible believers saw the papacy and Islam as antichrists. Do you have evidence to support this? Prior to the Reformation, what orthodox Christian(s) considered the Pope to be the Antichrist?

[spauline]

[QUOTE=David_A_Reed]For a thousand years or more, Bible believers saw the papacy and Islam as antichrists. Do you have evidence to support this? Prior to the Reformation, what orthodox Christian(s) considered the Pope to be the Antichrist?

We don't have to take this abuse, RC! The Scriptures are CATHOLIC. And if they are, at least on one level, about the history of Salvation, including the NT era, then they tell it from a CATHOLIC viewpoint. If that's the case, surely Protestantism is in there, or at least in idealism, the principle of heresy. Indeed, the Church recognizes several categories of religion that lie in between full Catholic and full Apostate, and they more or less follow the history of the major spiritual opposition to the Church's doctrinal development. In fact, if we start from Constantine to present, the devil has pretty much been attacking the SOURCES of Divine Truth (as Catholicism understands them) from TOP to BOTTOM. Here's the pyramid to refresh your memory:

I. The Trinity and Incarnation
II. The Pope
III. The rest of Bishops and General Oral Tradition
IV. The Written Tradition (Scripture)
V. Reason

And really, just look at the major history. the First great wave of heresies for the most part beginning with Nicae are an affront to the Trinity and/or Incarnation (of which ISLAM is the worst, which is also referenced in the CCC)

After Islam, the next great attack was clearly the Great Schism between East and West, which appropriately attacks the Pope but retains the rest of Oral Tradition. And this was SCHISM, which the Catechism references.

Next is Protestantism, which attacks the whole Oral Tradition and Apostolic Succession and leaves only Scripture (most of it, that is :wink: ). And this was HERESY, which, again, the CCC references.

Next, comes the "Enlightenment", which attacks even Scripture and removes the SUPERnatural element of religion and retains only "reason" and natural religion (i.e., deists, rationalists). From what I understand, the US CCC condemns this "historical reductionism" which denies the supernatural essence of the Christian religion.

finally, the modern era even scraps reason and places faith merely in the materialistic, of which we now have as secular messianism, which the CCC utterly condemns as a lie of antichrist.

So if you ask me, people who think the pope is antichrist are ludicrous. The false prophet is the lie that places the material progress of man and the affronts to the foundational morals of life and sexuality above ANY religion, that "exalts above ALL that is called god or is worshipped".

Just my two cents, but I can see this gradual digression in the trumpets, where those "sealed by God" are Catholics, being protected from [i]spiritual harm in their "forehead" [the intellect] because they have the foundation of truth. And the end result of the spiritual attacks of the trumpets is the mark of the beast, which in the forehead would seem to mean (at least to me) a person who is his "own god" in his mind, who will not hear the Church, who will not hear Scripture, who will not even hear reason.

again, just my two cents.

:smile:

[headheart]

A splash in passing:-

I never know why people ask this question...a better one would have been, was Nicodemus the Antichrist? He was religious, he was not born again, and the divinity of Christ was the last thing on his mind.

Read:- John 3:1-21

I just love Jesus' only question:- :wink:

'Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?'

Translated into Modern Slang, it means:

'Wahrlich, wahrlich ich sage dir: Wir reden, was wir wissen, und zeugen, was wir gesehen haben; und ihr nehmt unser Zeugnis nicht an. Glaubet ihr nicht, wenn ich euch von irdischen Dingen sage, wie würdet ihr glauben, wenn ich euch von himmlischen Dingen sagen würde?'

Ooops, that is German by an Augustinian Monk turned Reformer by the name of Professor Martin Luther.

Let me try again:- - English Slang - From the Reading Bible.

'Listen carefully. I'm speaking sober truth to you. I speak only of what I know by experience; I give witness only to what I have seen with my own eyes. There is nothing secondhand here, no hearsay. Yet instead of facing the evidence and accepting it, you procrastinate with questions. If I tell you things that are plain as the hand before your face and you don't believe me, what use is there in telling you of things you can't see, the things of God?'

The only way one could be an anti-christ would be to not have the Spirit of Christ...So if the Pope does not have the Spirit of Christ, then He is not Christ's...but who is going to be so bold as to say something like that. All judgment has been defferred until return of Jesus Christ.

Shalom.
:pray:

[RCNicholas]

We don't have to take this abuse, RC!...
Oh, thanks friend, but to be honest I really am interested to see what actual evidence that he has that orthodox Christians prior to the Reformation thought the Pope was the Antichrist. I suspect that I am going to be shown the same unfortunate ignorance of Church history that Protestants so often display in other dialogues, but of course I could be wrong. For now, let's at least give him a chance to respond. God Bless

[Mickey]

So if the Pope does not have the Spirit of Christ, then He is not Christ's...but who is going to be so bold as to say something like that.
"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity" (Mt.7:22-23).

Actually,headheart,I agree that the pope is not the antichrist.

Instead,the pope will be the leader of "Mystery Babylon" in the future:

"And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH" (Rev.17:5).

The rites of the "mystery religions" began at Babylon.The teaching of those pagan religions was that one must submit to those rites in order to be saved.

And the Roman church adopted those same rites and adopted the same ideas that they brought salvation.In fact,the word "sacrament" is from the Latin word meaning "mystery".

No where in the Scriptures are the Eucharist or water baptism referred to as "mysteries",but in the pagan religions that was the name that was used to describe their "rites".

In Christ,
Mickey

[Ambassador]

[QUOTE=David_A_Reed]For a thousand years or more, Bible believers saw the papacy and Islam as antichrists. Do you have evidence to support this? Prior to the Reformation, what orthodox Christian(s) considered the Pope to be the Antichrist?


Hello, the Apostle Paul!

2 Thess. 2:3,4: is about the papacy.

The description is so real that one could almost think that it was written after the development of the papcy itself:

"That man of sin should be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God."

[RCNicholas]

[QUOTE=RCNicholas]


[BOX]Hello, the Apostle Paul!

2 Thess. 2:3,4: is about the papacy.

The description is so real that one could almost think that it was written after the development of the papcy itself:

"That man of sin should be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God."[/I] Howdy! Can you name any Christian(s) who believed that this verse applied to the Pope prior to the Reformation?

Since the Pope neither opposes God nor exalts himself above God, nor does He claim to be God....I'm not seeing how this applies to the Pope; your view that this applies to the Roman papacy is an extremely unique and interesting position to take, but historically it's quite novel, as I think you'll find if you do a bit of research.

[Ambassador]

[QUOTE=Ambassador][/BOX] Howdy! Can you name any Christian(s) who believed that this verse applied to the Pope prior to the Reformation?

Since the Pope neither opposes God nor exalts himself above God, nor does He claim to be God....I'm not seeing how this applies to the Pope; your view that this applies to the Roman papacy is an extremely unique and interesting position to take, but historically it's quite novel, as I think you'll find if you do a bit of research.


Hi RCNicholas:

To answer your question: we can go back further than just the Reformation and have sources other than the Apostle Paul.

The prophet Daniel also saw the rise of the ten-horned beast and the development of the papacy, and he describes its terrible work in Daniel 7:7,8, 19-25.

John the Revelator identified the papacy also:

"And all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshped the beast" (Rev. 13:3,4).

You are probably confused at this point. How could the papacy - the beast cause people to worship the dragon? Ok, consider this:

First- Pontifex Maximus was the high priest of the pagan religion of the Roman Empire and he claimed spiritual authority over men. The Pope of Rome makes the same claims and borrowed this title for himself and even parades around in similar attire.

Second- the pagans and heathen wore scapulars, medals, and images for personal protection. Roman Catholics wear the same idols for the same purpose.

Third- the pagans of the ancient Roman empire had an official ceremony of deification which accorded some special worship and honors after their death. The Roman Catholic papacy does the same thing when it exalts men in the process of canonization to the position of saints and then Roman Catholics offer up prayers to them.

Fourth- don't forget the orders of nuns and monks which is also an imitation of the vestal virgins of antiquity.

Fifth- The old temple known as the Pantheon of Rome which was built by Marcus Agrippa in 27 B.C. and consecrated to all the gods was redone by Pope Boniface IV, about 610 A.D. and reconsecrated to "the blessed Virgin and all the saints." From that time on - Roman Catholics prostrate in the very same temple and before the very same images and for the very same purposes, as did the pagans and heathen of old. And we know that all such practices were absolutely forbidden by the Mosaic law and had no place in Apostolic Christianity. Of course, the names of the idols have changed. But the same idolatrous worship is still conducted there at the present time.

[Mickey]

Hi RCNicholas:

To answer your question:
Sorry,but nothing you said answered his question,which was:
Howdy! Can you name any Christian(s) who believed that this verse applied to the Pope prior to the Reformation?

Since the Pope neither opposes God nor exalts himself above God, nor does He claim to be God....I'm not seeing how this applies to the Pope; your view that this applies to the Roman papacy is an extremely unique and interesting position to take, but historically it's quite novel, as I think you'll find if you do a bit of research.
None of the sources that you quoted specifically say the "son of perdition" is the pope of the church at Rome.

Even though you believe that these sources are describing the pope of the Roman church that does not mean that those same souces said that the pope is the son of perdition.

In Christ,
Mickey

[spauline]

[QUOTE=RCNicholas]


Hi RCNicholas:

To answer your question: we can go back further than just the Reformation and have sources other than the Apostle Paul.

The prophet Daniel also saw the rise of the ten-horned beast and the development of the papacy, and he describes its terrible work in Daniel 7:7,8, 19-25.

John the Revelator identified the papacy also:

"And all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshped the beast" (Rev. 13:3,4).

You are probably confused at this point. How could the papacy - the beast cause people to worship the dragon? Ok, consider this:

First- Pontifex Maximus was the high priest of the pagan religion of the Roman Empire and he claimed spiritual authority over men. The Pope of Rome makes the same claims and borrowed this title for himself and even parades around in similar attire.

Second- the pagans and heathen wore scapulars, medals, and images for personal protection. Roman Catholics wear the same idols for the same purpose.

Third- the pagans of the ancient Roman empire had an official ceremony of deification which accorded some special worship and honors after their death. The Roman Catholic papacy does the same thing when it exalts men in the process of canonization to the position of saints and then Roman Catholics offer up prayers to them.

Fourth- don't forget the orders of nuns and monks which is also an imitation of the vestal virgins of antiquity.

Fifth- The old temple known as the Pantheon of Rome which was built by Marcus Agrippa in 27 B.C. and consecrated to all the gods was redone by Pope Boniface IV, about 610 A.D. and reconsecrated to "the blessed Virgin and all the saints." From that time on - Roman Catholics prostrate in the very same temple and before the very same images and for the very same purposes, as did the pagans and heathen of old. And we know that all such practices were absolutely forbidden by the Mosaic law and had no place in Apostolic Christianity. Of course, the names of the idols have changed. But the same idolatrous worship is still conducted there at the present time.

Intercession of the Saints is idolatrous? Give me a break.

I think you should try reading my treatise on this:

Intercession of the Saints (http://www.catholicmeditations.org/subSites/apologetics/intercession_saints.php)

It explains that we venerate, not adore, the saints and angels and ask them to pray for us.

[The Reconciler]

[QUOTE=Ambassador]

Intercession of the Saints is idolatrous? Give me a break.

I think you should try reading my treatise on this:

Intercession of the Saints (http://www.catholicmeditations.org/subSites/apologetics/intercession_saints.php)

It explains that we venerate, not adore, the saints and angels and ask them to pray for us.



What is the difference between "Idolatrous Worship" and "Veneration" - when the Bible says do not bow down or pray to idols (statues and the like)???

[RCNicholas]

[QUOTE=Ambassador]


Hi RCNicholas:

To answer your question: we can go back further than just the Reformation and have sources other than the Apostle Paul.

The prophet Daniel also saw the rise of the ten-horned beast and the development of the papacy, and he describes its terrible work in Daniel 7:7,8, 19-25.Nothing in those passages refers to the Pope...it's your personal interpretation of those passages that they apply to the Pope...my question was, can you cite any Christians prior to the Reformation that
agree(d) with your interpretation?

[B]John the Revelator identified the papacy also:

"And all the world wondered after the beast. And they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshped the beast" (Rev. 13:3,4).Again, nothing here says anything about the Pope...can you cite any Christian(s) prior to the Reformation who believe(d) this passage refers to the Roman papacy?

You are probably confused at this point.I'm only confused as to why you won't answer my question...For all your attempts to connect pagan Rome with Christian Rome, you haven't told me of any Christians prior to the Reformation who agree with your interpretation of the Scriptures you have cited. When you do so, the conversation may get somewhere...until then, you're just applying a personal interpretation to prophecy that no one in the early Church (or any time until the Protestant Reformation) believed: a practice strictly forbidden in Scripture itself (2 Peter 1:20).

[spauline]

[QUOTE=spauline]



What is the difference between "Idolatrous Worship" and "Veneration" - when the Bible says do not bow down or pray to idols (statues and the like)???

again, all of your objections are treated in the essay which I posted. I don't think authentic dialogue is even possible with persons such as yourself. To think that Catholics worship idols or statues is unbelievable nonsense. Let me ask you this: seeing as Catholics believe that Christ is God, the only true Savior of the human race, that it is ontologically impossible for a human creature to live in accordance with love of God and neighbor without supernatural grace from above, the totality of which, ultimately, in infinite supply has been merited by Christ, given all this, if Catholics are then "children of the devil", under what classification do you place relativistic hedonists, who, in general, wouldn't even be caught dead in a church, who live solely for the pleasures of fornication and drunkenness and vain accomplishments, who do not give a flying pimple on a rat's --- whether God exists or not, what category do you place these people?

And so like what, you say that St. Maria Goretti went to hell after she died from the fourteen stabs of Alejandro with an ice pick as he attempted to rape her, and which she forgave, dying at a mere age 12? Oh, but of course, Maria was a pagan girl who worshipped wood and stone. Yeah, whatever. :ahem:

Let me know when you have been healed from unbelievable misconceptions and delusions.

[Good News Man]

[QUOTE=spauline]



What is the difference between "Idolatrous Worship" and "Veneration" - when the Bible says do not bow down or pray to idols (statues and the like)???





That is an excellent point. The Bible clearly says don't bow down before them (idols, statues and the like).

[David_A_Reed]

[QUOTE=David_A_Reed]For a thousand years or more, Bible believers saw the papacy and Islam as antichrists. Do you have evidence to support this? Prior to the Reformation, what orthodox Christian(s) considered the Pope to be the Antichrist?

Do a web search on Arnulf, Roman Catholic Bishop of Orleans, and "antichrist" and you will find plenty of proof that he called the pope "Antichrist, sitting in the temple of God, and showing himself as God" more than a thousand years ago, around the year 991 A.D.

Wycliffe and others referred to the pope the same way, well before the Reformation.

David

[RCNicholas]

[QUOTE=RCNicholas][BOX]

Do a web search on Arnulf, Roman Catholic Bishop of Orleans, and "antichrist" and you will find plenty of proof that he called the pope "Antichrist, sitting in the temple of God, and showing himself as God" more than a thousand years ago, around the year 991 A.D.

Wycliffe and others referred to the pope the same way, well before the Reformation.

DavidThanks for the references; I'll do a bit of research. :)

[Good News Man]

[QUOTE=RCNicholas][BOX]

Do a web search on Arnulf, Roman Catholic Bishop of Orleans, and "antichrist" and you will find plenty of proof that he called the pope "Antichrist, sitting in the temple of God, and showing himself as God" more than a thousand years ago, around the year 991 A.D.

Wycliffe and others referred to the pope the same way, well before the Reformation.

David


Dear David:

I appreciate your willingness to stand for truth. Don't back down. I'm praying for you to be strong in the Lord and in the Power of His might. May God richly bless you and your ministry.

Good News Man

[David_A_Reed]

[QUOTE=David_A_Reed]


Dear David:

I appreciate your willingness to stand for truth. Don't back down. I'm praying for you to be strong in the Lord and in the Power of His might. May God richly bless you and your ministry.

Good News ManThank you, Good News Man! Your kind words are much appreciated.

David

[spauline]

OK, I guess I have to state it, seeing as you don't read the article.

Do you have pictures of your loved ones in your living room? But aren't those "likenesses" of something on earth? Do you bow down and worship them? No. These images are just reminders of the ones you love. They help you think of them and recall your love for them.

that's what Catholic images of the saints are. They are images that remind us of our loved ones in heaven, who have fought the good fight and pray for us constantly. When we kneel before an image of the Blessed Virgin, we are not "bowing down and worshipping" either the image or the Virgin. We are coming before her in humility in our heart and mind and asking her to pray for us, just as we would ask a Christian on earth to pray for us. the image just helps us concentrate in our prayer to her.

secondly, prayer to the Virgin does not mean worship of the Virgin. In this case it means ASKING the Virgin for help. Pray can mean WORSHIP in the case to God, in the case of the saints, it means ASKING for help, like, in the Middle Ages, one would say to the earthly king, "I pray thee to intervene...", but it would not mean, "I worship thee."

Hope this helps.

[maudman]

[/b]
Sorry,but nothing you said answered his question,which was:

None of the sources that you quoted specifically say the "son of perdition" is the pope of the church at Rome.

Even though you believe that these sources are describing the pope of the Roman church that does not mean that those same souces said that the pope is the son of perdition.

In Christ,
Mickey

Hello Mickey

If one takes in account 2nd thess, and takes in account what is happening one can see that the Church was concerned because many were leaving but what was also happening was many were starting to believe the Gospel too.

They saw a sign in those leaving. Now Paul is writing to them, trying to calm their fears because the sign of leaving preceded the return of Christ.

They didn't see leaving as positive but negative!!!!

Paul is telling them to remain faithful. Letters apparently circulating as if the Apostle had written them, trying to get them to leave the Church. They are not crouched ready to jump ship but preparing themselves for Christ’s return.

The falling away is cause by the man of sin who claims authority over the Authority that God had place in his temple. His words and message would deceive. Cause a falling away and this man would be in the church. If the Church is the Temple how could one leave it and remain in the Temple of God. How can the Bride be the Bride if she doesn’t remain in the Body of Christ that dwells in the temple.

If Orthodoxy retained many of the traditions of the Church and it broke centuries before Protestant faith how do you explain that Protestant faith doesn’t look and appear more like orthodoxy. You can’t simply because the unity of the church was the concern of the Apostles. They were trying to preserve the Body of Christ the Bride dwelling in the Temple of God.

The Pope is an apostle who labors to preserve the unity of the Church. Not only the Gospel, but also the Church. It is seen as one man causing or leading the falling away from the church by most that interpret the scriptures, “””but actually it is a type of man”””, This man is more than one man. There may be one man who represents what that type of man stands for he's not acting alone. Remember he deceives and causes a falling away from the Temple. The Saints are charged to remain faithful.

The texts never say’s the man of Sin is the Authority of the Church but exaults himself as an Authority in the Church.

Peace

MDN

[Mickey]

To think that Catholics worship idols or statues is unbelievable nonsense.
spauline,

The followers of the church at Rome "worship" Mary and if you ask them if they do they will tell you "yes".

I have lived in Mexico for almost thirty years and the teaching of the church at Rome here is not the same as the teaching heard in the USA.

Since no one is to "worship" anyone but the Lord then why does not some responsible people from Rome come here and straighten out this "worship" of Mary?

In Christ,
Mickey

[Good News Man]

OK, I guess I have to state it, seeing as you don't read the article.

Do you have pictures of your loved ones in your living room? But aren't those "likenesses" of something on earth? Do you bow down and worship them? No. These images are just reminders of the ones you love. They help you think of them and recall your love for them.

that's what Catholic images of the saints are. They are images that remind us of our loved ones in heaven, who have fought the good fight and pray for us constantly. When we kneel before an image of the Blessed Virgin, we are not "bowing down and worshipping" either the image or the Virgin. We are coming before her in humility in our heart and mind and asking her to pray for us, just as we would ask a Christian on earth to pray for us. the image just helps us concentrate in our prayer to her.

secondly, prayer to the Virgin does not mean worship of the Virgin. In this case it means ASKING the Virgin for help. Pray can mean WORSHIP in the case to God, in the case of the saints, it means ASKING for help, like, in the Middle Ages, one would say to the earthly king, "I pray thee to intervene...", but it would not mean, "I worship thee."

Hope this helps.



Sounds like a pure case of Roman Catholic brainwashing combined with your own EXCUSES.

Where in the Bible does it state that you have "loved ones in heaven who have fought the good fight and are praying for you constantly"???? And where in the Bible does it state that you are authorized to make an image to those "loved ones" you talk about ????

Where in the Bible does it instruct you to ask "The Virgin" for help or to pray to her ???

Are you not aware that "there is only one mediator between God and Man - the man Christ Jesus" ????

Are you not aware that the Bible tells us to "let our requests be made known unto God..." ???

[spauline]

Sounds like a pure case of Roman Catholic brainwashing combined with your own EXCUSES.

Where in the Bible does it state that you have "loved ones in heaven who have fought the good fight and are praying for you constantly"???? And where in the Bible does it state that you are authorized to make an image to those "loved ones" you talk about ????

Where in the Bible does it instruct you to ask "The Virgin" for help or to pray to her ???

Are you not aware that "there is only one mediator between God and Man - the man Christ Jesus" ????

Are you not aware that the Bible tells us to "let our requests be made known unto God..." ???

first, there are no verses in Scripture that say you are only to use Scripture. You would not even know what writings belong in Scripture were it not for the Sacred Oral Tradition of Catholicism. A Protestant cannot have an objective basis for believing that his canon is correct. He can only have a subjective "faith" that what he indeed possesses are those books, and ONLY those books, that are inspired. So that dethrones your "where in Scripture does it say...?" rant. Sola scriptura is a logically suicidal belief. Why should you only follow Scripture if the Scriptures don't tell you to only follow Scripture?

And your "one Mediator..." thing has already been addressed in the first section of my article.

As I said, there is no dialoguing with people like you. Forums such as these are like a haven for people who are not interested in finding the truth, but who only have an axe to grind. I don't think that any further dialogue is even possible if you refuse to at least read the stuff that rebutts many of your accusations.

[spauline]

spauline,

The followers of the church at Rome "worship" Mary and if you ask them if they do they will tell you "yes".

I have lived in Mexico for almost thirty years and the teaching of the church at Rome here is not the same as the teaching heard in the USA.

Since no one is to "worship" anyone but the Lord then why does not some responsible people from Rome come here and straighten out this "worship" of Mary?

In Christ,
Mickey

as i've indicated, the word "worship" can have different meanings in different times and places: we do "worship" the Virgin, if we understand by "worship", a VENERATION of her immaculate holiness. But in that case, it would not mean the same type of "worship" as that given to God. That is why, if you read my article (hello, hello!), the Church uses more technical terms:

To God ALONE is given "LATRIA". To the saints in general "DULIA" and the singular Virgin of virgins, "HYPER-DULIA".

Let me ask you this, if you don't have a problem with HONORing veterans or men who have died in battle to defend freedom, why would you not HONOR (NOT LATRIA), those men and women who have exercised heroic virtue not for a civil state, but for the kingdom of God?

Again, the article addresses all this, but nobody really wants to read it. :ahem:

[maudman]

as i've indicated, the word "worship" can have different meanings in different times and places: we do "worship" the Virgin, if we understand by "worship", a VENERATION of her immaculate holiness. But in that case, it would not mean the same type of "worship" as that given to God. That is why, if you read my article (hello, hello!), the Church uses more technical terms:

To God ALONE is given "LATRIA". To the saints in general "DULIA" and the singular Virgin of virgins, "HYPER-DULIA".

Let me ask you this, if you don't have a problem with HONORing veterans or men who have died in battle to defend freedom, why would you not HONOR (NOT LATRIA), those men and women who have exercised heroic virtue not for a civil state, but for the kingdom of God?

Again, the article addresses all this, but nobody really wants to read it. :ahem:

Hello spauline.

After years in the protestant faiths, and not all protestants but I would say 85 % are convinced that their interpetaions are correct and because they are not RCC are closer to the truth.

What I found most alarming is that they most often interpret the bible not from any real cultural understanding of ANE culture. Most often when I have encountered those who understand some things they are less hostile, Modernisms have destroyed most all connection with the truth of Christian heritage. Most all have never even set foot in a RC CHurch or even tried to understand it.

But the RC has a heritage and it shows in the attitude. It always amazes me how many can just pick up the scriptures and justify themselves with it.

They put themselves first and bare witness of themselve with scripture. They are this because they follw the scripture.

But we know cause CHrist said ""if I bare witness of myself, Then my witness isn't true for I come not to bare witness of myself but he that sent me therefore my witness is true.

We are fortunate because we don't bare witness of ourselves but the Church. We are sent to bare witness of he who sends us. How can a protestant do this with there being so many different Protestant faiths. """"We have One faith"""". Justifing oneself with scripture is bad all the way around. Scripture justifies God not man.

Who are they really defending with the bible on TWEB? Themselves because that is what they believe and you could find many of similar faiths that would disagree with them. We don't defend ourselves but the Church and we sleep better knowing its not in vain. Its not an issue of salvation for us, but reward because we are rewarded for our works.

They have to be right because as they understand history their fore fathers left the Church and its only the body of Christ because they say it not because it is.

We are most fo