Historical Church Leaders Call Pope Antichrist

[Fireinfolding]

Thanks, thats probably why I never get stuff, because I never understand most of the words, the definitions (in comparison) or the explanations. But I did ask, and theres a reason I typically dont do that lol

 

[thecolorsblend]

has she blasphemed God by claiming to be able to forgive sins?

Since this point seems to have gotten lost, the Pharisees agreed with EastCoastRemnant saying only God can forgive sins. This very skepticism prompted the following:

Why doth this man speak thus? he blasphemeth. Who can forgive sins, but God only?

Which Jesus presently knowing in his spirit, that they so thought within themselves, saith to them: Why think you these things in your hearts? Which is easier, to say to the sick of the palsy: Thy sins are forgiven thee; or to say: Arise, take up thy bed, and walk?

But that you may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say to thee: Arise, take up thy bed, and go into thy house.
-- St. Mark 2:7-11 (DRA)

So Our Lord clearly has the ability to forgive sins. What does that say about the Church?

Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.
-- St. Matthew 18:18

Our Lord clearly believed this was worth repeating because after His resurrection...

He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.
-- St. John 20:21–23 (DRA)

So, as Wgw has suggested, unless you deny those are canonical scriptures, you're left with the inescapable conclusion that the Church has Son-given authority to hear and forgive (or not forgive) sins.

 

[Optimax]

Yeah your right the title pope wasn't mentioned was it? There is a bunch of words we all use in daily in religious context that is not in Scripture.

And no not a big jump at all, since I just pointed out to you that you are using a false narrative to argue with.

A false narrative!

When ya can't really prove that the scripture on which the whole pope thing hinges on.

All one can do is say things like "false narrative" another one that brings the chuckles is "strawman".

 

[ViaCrucis]

Nope pretty ancient. It has nothing to do with the inquisition or fighting heretics. It speaks of the spiritual battle in which we all fight to overcome sin in this world. "Lord make me an instrument..."

Or to use biblical language, the Church militant are those who are, at present "fighting the good fight", 1 Timothy 6:12.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[thecolorsblend]

Labour as a good soldier of Christ Jesus.
-- 2 Timothy 2:3 (DRA)

Sounds pretty "militant" to me.

 

[Fireinfolding]

2 Ti 2:3 Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.

1. to suffer (endure) evils (hardships, troubles)
   
   
2. to be afflicted

Even as He is our commander who himself suffered

 

[Fireinfolding]

2 Ti 2:3 Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.

1. to suffer (endure) evils (hardships, troubles)
   
   
2. to be afflicted

Even as He is our commander who himself suffered

Jesus Christ is given as our commander and leader

Isaiah 55:4 Behold, I have given him for a witness to the people, a leader and commander to the people.

As a soldier of his its enduring hardness (suffering)

2 Ti 2:3 Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.

And example of the same is

1 Peter 2:23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously.

Militant is more the agressor, favoring extreme violence where as says here

2 Cr 10:4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds )

2 Cr 10:5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

Arming oneself in the same mind in respects to suffering

1 Peter 4:1 Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath sufferedin the flesh hath ceased from sin;

Putting on the armor of God also.

 

[patricius79]

Here are some quotes that show that all the protestants and even some catholics considered the papacy to be the antichrist:

Eberhard II, archbishop of Salzburg (Roman Catholic)
"stated at a synod of bishops held at Regensburg in 1240 (some scholars say 1241) that the people of his day were "accustomed" to calling the pope antichrist." -LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers, 4 vols. (Wash DC: Review and Herald publishing assc, 1950-1954)

John Wycliffe
"When the western church was divided for about 40 years between two rival popes, one in Rome and the other in Avigon, France, each pope called the other pope antichrist - and John Wycliffe is reputed to have regarded them as both being right: "two halves of Antichrist, making up the perfect Man of Sin between them." -Ibid

Martin Luther (Lutheran)
"We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist...personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to Antichrist." (Aug. 18, 1520) Taken from The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 2., pg. 121 by Froom. (In response to a papal bull [official decree]): "I despise and attack it, as impious, false... It is Christ Himself who is condemned therein... I rejoice in having to bear such ills for the best of causes. Already I feel greater liberty in my heart; for at last I know that the pope is antichrist, and that his throne is that of Satan himself." --D'Aubigné, b.6, ch. 9.

Cotton Mather (Congregational Theologian)
"The oracles of God foretold the rising of an Antichrist in the Christian Church: and in the Pope of Rome, all the characteristics of that Antichrist are so marvelously answered that if any who read the Scriptures do not see it, there is a marvelous blindness upon them." Taken from The Fall of Babylon by Cotton Mather in Froom's book, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 3, pg. 113.

John Wesley (Methodist)
Speaking of the Papacy he said, "He is in an emphatical sense, the Man of Sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled the Son of Perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers... He it is...that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped...claiming the highest power, and highest honour...claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone." Taken from Antichrist and His Ten Kingdoms by John Wesley, pg. 110.

Ellen G. White (Seven Day Adventists)
"This compromise between paganism and Christianity resulted in the development of "the man of sin" foretold in prophecy as opposing and exalting himself above God. That gigantic system of false religion is a masterpiece of Satan's power--a monument of his efforts to seat himself upon the throne to rule the earth according to his will.

Thomas Cranmer (Anglican)
"Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons." (Referring to prophecies in Revelation and Daniel.) Taken from Works by Cranmer, Vol. 1, pp. 6-7.

Roger Williams (First Baptist Pastor in America)
He spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself...speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws; but he is the son of perdition (II Thess. 2)." Taken from The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers by Froom, Vol. 3, pg. 52.

1689 London Baptist Confession
Chapter 26: Of the Church. The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church, in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner; neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming. ( Colossians 1:18; Matthew 28:18-20; Ephesians 4:11, 12; 2 Thessalonians 2:2-9 )

John Knox (Scotch Presbyterian)
Knox wrote to abolish "that tyranny which the pope himself has for so many ages exercised over the church" and that the pope should be recognized as "the very antichrist, and son of perdition, of whom Paul speaks." Taken from The Zurich Letters, pg. 199 by John Knox.
John Calvin (Presbyterian)
"Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt... I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." Taken from Institutes by John Calvin.

If they called the Master of the House Beelzebub, how much more the members of the house? And still more the servant of Christ set over the house.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Here are some quotes that show that all the protestants and even some catholics considered the papacy to be the antichrist:

Eberhard II, archbishop of Salzburg (Roman Catholic)
"stated at a synod of bishops held at Regensburg in 1240 (some scholars say 1241) that the people of his day were "accustomed" to calling the pope antichrist." -LeRoy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers, 4 vols. (Wash DC: Review and Herald publishing assc, 1950-1954)

John Wycliffe
"When the western church was divided for about 40 years between two rival popes, one in Rome and the other in Avigon, France, each pope called the other pope antichrist - and John Wycliffe is reputed to have regarded them as both being right: "two halves of Antichrist, making up the perfect Man of Sin between them." -Ibid

Martin Luther (Lutheran)
"We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist...personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to Antichrist." (Aug. 18, 1520) Taken from The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 2., pg. 121 by Froom. (In response to a papal bull [official decree]): "I despise and attack it, as impious, false... It is Christ Himself who is condemned therein... I rejoice in having to bear such ills for the best of causes. Already I feel greater liberty in my heart; for at last I know that the pope is antichrist, and that his throne is that of Satan himself." --D'Aubigné, b.6, ch. 9.

Cotton Mather (Congregational Theologian)
"The oracles of God foretold the rising of an Antichrist in the Christian Church: and in the Pope of Rome, all the characteristics of that Antichrist are so marvelously answered that if any who read the Scriptures do not see it, there is a marvelous blindness upon them." Taken from The Fall of Babylon by Cotton Mather in Froom's book, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 3, pg. 113.

John Wesley (Methodist)
Speaking of the Papacy he said, "He is in an emphatical sense, the Man of Sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled the Son of Perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers... He it is...that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped...claiming the highest power, and highest honour...claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone." Taken from Antichrist and His Ten Kingdoms by John Wesley, pg. 110.

Ellen G. White (Seven Day Adventists)
"This compromise between paganism and Christianity resulted in the development of "the man of sin" foretold in prophecy as opposing and exalting himself above God. That gigantic system of false religion is a masterpiece of Satan's power--a monument of his efforts to seat himself upon the throne to rule the earth according to his will.

Thomas Cranmer (Anglican)
"Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons." (Referring to prophecies in Revelation and Daniel.) Taken from Works by Cranmer, Vol. 1, pp. 6-7.

Roger Williams (First Baptist Pastor in America)
He spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself...speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws; but he is the son of perdition (II Thess. 2)." Taken from The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers by Froom, Vol. 3, pg. 52.

1689 London Baptist Confession
Chapter 26: Of the Church. The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church, in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner; neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming. ( Colossians 1:18; Matthew 28:18-20; Ephesians 4:11, 12; 2 Thessalonians 2:2-9 )

John Knox (Scotch Presbyterian)
Knox wrote to abolish "that tyranny which the pope himself has for so many ages exercised over the church" and that the pope should be recognized as "the very antichrist, and son of perdition, of whom Paul speaks." Taken from The Zurich Letters, pg. 199 by John Knox.
John Calvin (Presbyterian)
"Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt... I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." Taken from Institutes by John Calvin.

So, people call other people names, and it must be true? Prove that. Look at our current Republicans in the presidential race. They call each other all sorts of things, many of which are not true. And just because a Protestant calls the pope an antichrist doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Lift Him Up is riddled with classically Nestorian statements. What is more, she has elsewhere variously endorsed Chiliasm, Iconoclasm and Donatism.



No Pope has publically claimed to be above God. Privately one suspects the Borgias or Julius II may well have harboured delusions of grandeur, but they had the political smarts not to claim it publically.

And even if they had, it wouldn't make it so. Had they demanded that the whole of the Catholic world bow down and worship them, there would have been some shake-up. But they were too self-immersed to do anything like that.

There is a thinly veiled pretense of sola scriptura, however, Adventism as a whole represents a spectacular capitulation to Rabinnical traditions regarding the Sabbath. What is more, the infallibility you seem to wish to assign to her writings amounts to a tradition of men.



Christian clerics have the right to bind and loose sin on the basis of Matthew 16:18. Do Adventists deny this is canonical scripture?



On which basis one might alternately reject the idea that antichrist has been in the world in any capacity; certainly, the ridiculous notion that every Roman bishop is ex officio the antichrist.



I have thoroughly debated the absurd claims of Ellen G. White on these before in other threads, and am prepared to debate them again, as they are entirely without merit.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Seeing how you included EG White in your list, please quote for me something she wrote that is heretical, that opposes the righteousness of Christ. Did she ever state that she was equal to or above God as many Popes have claimed? Has she taught people that traditions carry more weight than scripture? has she blasphemed God by claiming to be able to forgive sins?

No pope has claimed to be equal to or above God. No pope has taught that traditions carry more weight than scripture, either. And no pope claims to be able to forgive sins. Christ forgives sins, the pope or any priest merely pronounces the absolution.

 

[Root of Jesse]

"The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth." Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Chapter XXVII, p. 218, "Cities Petrus Bertanous".

Need to stop cutting and pasting your sources...http://biblelight.net/Barclay.html

Pope Nicholas I declared that "the appellation of God had been confirmed by Constantine on the Pope, who, being God, cannot be judged by man." - Labb IX Dist.: 96 Can. 7, Satis evidentur, Decret GratianPrimer Para.

Never did Pope Nicholas I. say that the Pope is God. What he does say is this:"Since those in higher authority are not judged by inferiors, it is evident that the Apostolic See, than which no earthly authority is higher, is judged by none."And that is perfectly sound reasoning. Even in civil law, the king is "above the law," and not subject to his own laws. Hence the legal axiom, "The king can do no wrong." Italy itself has acknowledged the justice of the Pope's claim to be independent of all civil jurisdiction, and subject to no earthly authorities.

If I might add, the citation "Labb IX Dist.: 96 Can 7 Satis Evidentur Decret Gratian Primer Para" is obscure. I checked his opera omnia (whole works) here (based on Migne's Patrologia Latina) and found no document similar to the one above.

"We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" ...Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894,

This is a classic case of "cherry-picking a quote out of context." The Encyclical mentioned here is Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, which called for the reunion of Eastern and Western churches into the "Unity of the Faith". What then, does the actual Encyclical say?


...A great deal, however, has been wanting to the entire fulness of that consolation. Amidst these very manifestations of public joy and reverence Our thoughts went out towards the immense multitude of those who are strangers to the gladness that filled all Catholic hearts: some because they lie in absolute ignorance of the Gospel; others because they dissent from the Catholic belief, though they bear the same name of Christians. This thought has been, and is, a source of deep concern to Us; for it is impossible to think of such a large portion of mankind deviating, as it were, from the right path, as they move away from Us, and not experience a sentiment of innermost grief. But since We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty, who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth, and now that Our advanced age and the bitterness of anxious cares urge Us on towards the end common to every mortal, We feel drawn to follow the example of Our Redeemer and Master, Jesus Christ, who when about to return to Heaven, implored of God, His Father, in earnest prayer, that His disciples and followers should be of one mind and of one heart: "I pray...that they all may be one, as thou Father in Me, and I in Thee: that they also may be one in Us." And as this divine prayer and supplication does not include only the souls who then believed in Jesus Christ, but also every one of those who were henceforth to believe in Him, this prayer holds out to Us no indifferent reason for confidently expressing Our hopes, and for making all possible endeavors in order that the men of every race and clime should be called and moved to embrace the unity of divine faith.

Pressed on to Our intent by charity, that hastens fastest there where the need is greatest, We direct Our first thoughts to those most unfortunate of all nations who have never received the light of the Gospel, or who, after having possessed it, have lost it through neglect or the vicissitudes of time: hence do they ignore God, and live in the depths of error. Now, as all salvation comes from Jesus Christ--for there is no other name under Heaven given to men whereby we must be saved--Our ardent desire is that the most holy name of Jesus should rapidly pervade and fill every land.


1.) If the Pope identifies himself as God, then why does he refer to the Lord Jesus as "Our Redeemer and Master?" Surely God cannot have a master as that would imply that there is someone superior to him.

2.) The phrase is interpreted in the wrong sense by many here. In the Catholic point of view, "we hold upon this Earth the place of God" makes perfect sense, as Catholics believe that the Pope is the Vicar (i.e. Representative) of Christ. What does a representative do? He "holds the place" of the person he represents! Far from claiming that he is God in the flesh, Pope Leo is just reaffirming his position as Christ's representative (like a Prime Minister) on Earth.

 

[Root of Jesse]

The quoted scripture, Matt 16:18, when viewed in it's original language actually doesn't say what you and the RC church claims it does...
The rock that Peter is referred to is "petros"... a stone, pebble, fragment of rock, whereas the rock that Jesus refers to as the foundation of the church, "petra" is the rock itself from which the stone came from. Jesus is the Rock that the church is built on...

Except Scripture never uses 'petros' or 'petra'. It uses Cephas/Kephas. Many times debunked argument.

1 Cor 10:4b
...and that Rock was Christ.

We believe the rock is Christ, and his representative was Peter, the Rock, on Earth.

There is of course the scriptural knowledge that Peter wasn't the head of the church. If he was, why did James head the council dealing with the circumcision issue? Why did Paul, openly oppose Peter? And why did Peter himself state that he was nothing more than a fellow elder in 1 Peter 5:1.
Then there is the issue of Peter being a married man which I'm sure you will admit creates a sticky situation for apostolic succession for the Pope.

James may have lead the council of Jerusalem, because he was the head of the Church in Jerusalem. Peter, though, gave his opinion and affirmed the decision of the Council, which is what a Pope does.
Popes can also be wrong, and Paul opposed Peter because in that instance Peter was wrong.
Peter says he's a fellow elder because the pope is, first and foremost, the bishop of his diocese. He would not self-aggrandize, either.
Peter was married, but it doesn't make any sticky situation regarding succession.

The claim of apostolic succession by the Papacy vaporizes when exposed to the light of truth... without that claim, the Papacy appears as it really is, an imposter that usurps God Divinity... the apostate church, the great harlot.

Maybe so in your mind, but the Holy Spirit is what guides the Church.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Really?! What's so obscure about the quote, it reads as clear as the light of day. Just because it doesn't mesh with catholic theology only means that the catholic laity has been deceived as to the true spirit of the Papacy. To all those that value Truth and the Word of God as sacred, God says to come out of this apostate church or else you will receive of her plagues.

Except that they're fraudulent quotes, or taken out of context.

 

[Root of Jesse]

I dont get a militant deal

look at the etymology of the word...

 

[RLBeers]

There is a difference in what the Bible defines as the eventual antichrist and the assorted leaders of the theocracy called the Catholic Church. The first has yet to arise, as is shown by what we see in the news. The others are simply misguided old men.

 

[patricius79]

There is a difference in what the Bible defines as the eventual antichrist and the assorted leaders of the theocracy called the Catholic Church. The first has yet to arise, as is shown by what we see in the news. The others are simply misguided old men.

I don't think Catholics are misguided about the Papacy. It is the gift of Christ to preserve the truth of the faith. The Catholic Church--in union with the Papacy--is the source of the N.T. Canon many centuries before Protestantism arose.

 

[Wgw]

I don't think Catholics are misguided about the Papacy. It is the gift of Christ to preserve the truth of the faith. The Catholic Church--in union with the Papacy--is the source of the N.T. Canon many centuries before Protestantism arose.

Actually no; the NT canon as we now know it first was outlined in the 39th Paschal Epistle of St. Athanasius, the Patriarch of Alexandria, whose direct successors are Coptic and Greek Orthodox.

 

[patricius79]

Actually no; the NT canon as we now know it first was outlined in the 39th Paschal Epistle of St. Athanasius, the Patriarch of Alexandria, whose direct successors are Coptic and Greek Orthodox.

Yes, he was the Patriarch of Alexandria. St. Athanasius was in full communion with the Catholic Church and the Successor of St. Rock, and laid his case before him during the Arian crisis.

When Pope St. Julius wrote that Athanasius never should have been ousted without the approval of the Papacy, Athanasius preserved Julius's writing without objection.

No Bishop except the Vicar of Christ had the authority to define the N.T. Canon.

 

[Erose]

Actually no; the NT canon as we now know it first was outlined in the 39th Paschal Epistle of St. Athanasius, the Patriarch of Alexandria, whose direct successors are Coptic and Greek Orthodox.

Actually no. The NT canon was reported by St. Athanasius, not established by him. He was speaking of what already was, at least in his Patriarchate. The Catholic Church as a whole, East and West formed the Canon, by a process that is not completely known.