Is the pope the antichrist?

With the upcoming Pope's visit to Britain, we have to ask the
question, is the Pope the antichrist?

At the Council of Regensburg in 1240, Eberhard II, the archbishop of Salzburg was the first to identity the little horn with the papacy.
This interpretation was then adopted by Wycliffe, Luther, Cranmer,
Knox and virtually all the Reformation and post Reformation expositors in the Continent, Great Britain and then the United States.

Today the mood seems to have changed, the protestant churches having abandoned the Scriptures, and so are ready to prostitute their faith with human traditions.

Daniel 7 clearly outlines the rise of power:
Babylon = Lion
Medo-Persia = Bear
Greece = Leopard
Rome = Terrible beast
Europe = 10 horns and little horn
Heavenly Element = Judgement, saints receive the kingdom

In the sixth century following the demise of classical civilisation in
Rome, the papacy rose to power. The Roman Empire collapsed as it was invaded by various tribes (represented by the ten horns) who settled in the region formerly occupied by Rome and became the modern nations of Western Europe. Some of these tribes had been opposed to the bishop of Rome because they held Arian beliefs contrary to the doctrines of Rome. The Arian doctrine denied that Christ was equal to God the Father. The three horns which were plucked up (Daniel 7:8) have been identified as the Heruli, Vandals and the Ostrogoths. The Heruli were defeated by the Ostrogoths in AD 493, and then the Vandals were defeated by Justinian in AD 534. In AD 533 the Emperor Justinian had recognised the bishop of Rome as the head of all the churches, but because Rome was under the control of the Ostrogoths this could not practically be put into effect. Then in AD 538 the Emperor's General Belisarius delivered Rome from the besieging Ostrogoths. The decisive victory occurred early on in the campaign, and although the Ostrogoths
continued to wreak havoc in Italy, they never regained their original hold over Rome. The damage done by the remaining Ostrogoths together with the bubonic plague and famine was very damaging to Italy and within a decade classical civilisation had perished in Rome. The victory over the Ostrogoths represented a turning point in the power of papal Rome which gradually stepped into the power vacuum that had been left behind following the collapse of pagan Rome. The three horns had been uprooted to make way for the little horn. Europe remained a collection of divided nations but there was a new spiritual power.

This spiritual nature is clearly revealed by the fact that the little
horn spoke against the Most High and persecuted God's people. By the end of the sixth century the bishop of Rome had greatly increased in power.

The papacy taught the people to make confessions to human priests for the forgiveness of sin and to buy indulgences. A monk named Tetzel collected a huge sum of money selling indulgences for the church by claiming that as soon as a coin hit the bottom of the chest a soul would go straight to heaven. The people were encouraged to buy these indulgences and make penances rather than being directed to look to Jesus Christ whose blood alone could save them. Martin Luther, when called before the Diet at Worms in 1521 to account for his writings criticising the papacy, defended himself by saying that the doctrines of Rome were wicked, harmed the bodies and souls of men and to recant would only strengthen the tyranny and open the doors to such blasphemy!

The attempt to change "the times and the laws" (Daniel 7:25) can be seen in the attempt to change the Sabbath to Sunday which is the only one of the Ten Commandments that deals with time. About 1400 AD, Petrus de Ancharano asserted that "The pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man, but of God, and he acts in the place of God upon earth, with the fullest power of binding and loosing his sheep." Gradually Rome promoted Sunday because of anti-Semitic sentiments in the Roman Empire and also to accommodate pagan converts when sun worship was prevalent in society. There were always a few Christians who followed the original apostolic tradition of keeping the seventh day Sabbath, such as the Celtic Christians of Britain. In Scotland the Saturday Sabbath was observed until the eleventh century until Queen Margaret set out to change this. She wrote to a cousin in England to complain that the Scots work on Sunday but keep Saturday in
a sabbatical manner.

The papacy claimed to have a higher authority than the Scriptures and those who rejected this were persecuted. The principle victims of this era were the Waldenses, Albigenses, Huguenots, the Reformers and the victims of the Inquisition. For centuries those who held the authority of the Scriptures above the bishop of Rome were mercilessly hunted down, tortured and executed. One of the worst atrocities was the St Bartholomew's day massacre when in one day tens of thousands of Protestants were massacred for their faith. The papacy stopped the common people from having access to the Bible by keeping it in the Latin language. When William Tyndale wanted to translate the Bible into English he had to go to Germany and smuggle Bibles into England by boat. Eventually he was caught and burned at the stake. His last prayer that the eyes of the king of England would be opened was miraculously answered. Two years after his death every church in England had a Bible in the English language for the common people to read, authorised by the king.

Revelation picks up the story and there is a clear correlation between the little horn and the beast which is said to recover from its deadly wound. According to prophect the pope will regain power and once again there will be persecution of those who keep God's commandments and have faith in Jesus (Rev. 12:17; 14:12).

Exploring the Heavenly Sanctuary: Understanding Seventh-day Adventist Theology

No.

LOL, short and sweet Gille.

"With the upcoming Pope's visit to Britain, we have to ask the
question, is the Pope the antichrist?"

Erm, no one HAS to ask that question. Just like no-one has to answer it.

Hes not the Antichrist, just a phenomally rich, powerful human being who thinks that being "Gods representitive on earth" gives him the right to sit in a golden palace preaching about poverty and humility whilst in Africa thousands of babies are dying of AIDS because he would rather stick to antiquated rules than releave the immense suffering of thousands of his followers. Oh yes and hes a Nazi.(Not a insult-he was an active member of Hitler youth)So no , not the antichrist, just an incredibly wicked human being.

Book sales still a bit slow, Marc?

I think we can see why.

Only in ''Great Britain '' could this drivel be dreamed up.

I'm convinced.

Black Mask

So am I.

Mask, HJ - Is there something you are not telling us ... ?

How do we know that Marc Rasell is not the antichrist and is just using the Pope as a scapegoat?

Wayne

Fairy Queen get alife and stop spouting drivel.read his words carefully and then reply or is that not much fun...you and charlieost should join forces. God Bless The Pope!!!!

MRASELL,

I have little hope of you reading this as you seem to come in, plug your books and then depart, however I am curious, since you refer to THE antichrist, whereas, as I recall the Bible refers to multiple antichrists. Why do you think that there is only one and why do you think it is is necessarily the Pope?

Wayne

athanasius
er..did read it carefully,the guy is clearly a little overzealous to say the least!but come on God bless the Pope, are you serious?He is everything the man Jesus was agaisnt(peaceful, simple life, no money or material trappings of any kind)Its times like this I feel its a shame that there really isnt a Heaven cos i would love to be at the pearly gates when he gets there and Jesus comes out personally to tell him he is a disgrace to his teachings and throws him downstairs to get crispy fried!

Wayne

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that "antichrist" is a term that is not found in the Bible? The man described in 2 Thess 2:3-4 sounds fairly antichristal, but even there the word is not used. Which are the multiple antichrists you had in mind?

Yes the Antichrist is mentioned in the Bible but it seems to describe those who either deny Christ in some form or claim to be Christ and perform miracles to decieve. Regardless what you feel about the Pope he hasn't done this so he's not the Antichrist so the origonal thread is a bit silly and ill informed.

the original thread is just so windows 95. Yawn...

Pendragon

I've decided - if you can't beat them, join them!

OK Aidan, but where is the antichrist mentioned in the Bible? So far as I am aware, "antichrist" is a non-biblical term that is from time to time suggested as an appropriate description or identifier for a charcter or entity that does appear in the Bible (the man in 2 Thess 2:3-4 being one of them).

If ever there was a case for - not tarring all Christians with the same brush - then this is it .

What a loon .

Why was the original post hidden, did it not add to the discussion? Surely it was that which was being discussed. Was it found so offensive by some that it had to be hidden. Does this kind of censorship not remind one of the secretive nature of the organisation, the head of which the discussion is about?
There were some very interesting points made in the first posting. Were we not meant to read them?
There's a name in the Bible for people like you who had this post hidden.
Zealots.
Thankyou MRASELL. They can't cope with what you write yet they believe every word of the book of Revelation. Astonishing.

And I don't think that the pope is the anti-christ. I think he is an old man living his life amongst those who share his dillusion. He is so deep in he has no choice.
I think that Christ would have pity.

Maureen C says:
"Only in ''Great Britain '' could this drivel be dreamed up. "

All the reformers in Europe and the United States had the same opinion.

Mr. W. D. Burchell says:
"MRASELL,

I have little hope of you reading this as you seem to come in, plug your books and then depart, however I am curious, since you refer to THE antichrist, whereas, as I recall the Bible refers to multiple antichrists. Why do you think that there is only one and why do you think it is is necessarily the Pope?

Wayne "

I left the last time because I did not want to read about spiritulism, which is such a dangerous philosophy that even to read it can be deadly.
I don't mind discussing the Bible.

Yes, I agree there are many antichrists, which all essentially deny salvation in Christ. I believe there will be an ultimate antichrist who is yet to come.
The pope is an antichrist, because anti in Greek can mean to take the place of something, and the papacy whose figurehead is the pope has its own system of priests who people confess to, when Christ is our High Priest who alone can mediate on our behalf for the forgiveness of sins.
Also only God can change his law, but the papacy claims the church and the pope can modify divine law which again is the spirit of the antichrist.

Any religion which teaches people to look for salvation in human works is the spirit of the antichrist. Also those that teach there is no law do the same thing in a different way, because where there is no law, there is no sin, and therefore no need of Jesus.

The papacy claims to have changed the Sabbath to Sunday, and this is the final point of controversy in the Book of Revelation. Who's authority do we follow God or the pope?

Aidan says:
"Yes the Antichrist is mentioned in the Bible but it seems to describe those who either deny Christ in some form or claim to be Christ and perform miracles to decieve. Regardless what you feel about the Pope he hasn't done this so he's not the Antichrist so the origonal thread is a bit silly and ill informed. "

anti in Greek can mean someone who seeks to take the place of someone else...

"Why was the original post hidden... Does this kind of censorship not remind one of the secretive nature of the organisation, the head of which the discussion is about?"
How many times do we have to hear this stuff? Amazon's method of hiding posts when they draw enough negative votes from independent customers but still allowing them be seen by anyone with a simple click while annoying to some, does not even come remotely come close to having similarities to the clandestine information control you allege The Vatican of having.

This is just as overblown saying it's Stalinesque or like Nazi propaganda, none of them still offered the option to still read something hidden. Yours is the same sort of mindset of seeing devil's around every corner that lead to the fantasies of the opening post.