Man of Lawlessness

[jgr]

Actually, you are right on this point. John wrote that many antichrists would come out from among them, making it obvious that none of them really belonged among those to whom he was writing to.

"Little children, it is the last hour: and as ye have heard that The Antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." (1 John 2:18-19).

The error you are making is presuming that this development needed many centuries to grow. John said that The Antichrist (ho antichristos)`was a present reality among the many antichrists that were already apparent at that "last hour". They were not "unrecognizable" as you suppose, because John said these many antichrists had already made their identity manifestly obvious to all by their not remaining among them.

John had apparently read Paul's previous letter to the Thessalonians about the Man of Lawlessness, which told the saints that the gathering of the resurrected believers at Christ's coming would not take place until just after this Man of Lawlessness (The Antichrist) had come and gone. John was reminding the believers of Paul's words on this matter, and telling them that the "last hour" before Christ's return had already arrived by then, as proved by the many antichrists that had already been manifested among them.

The presence of the many antichrists to which John referred did not preclude the emergence of an antichrist of the unique characteristics which Paul described. Thus, an antichrist who did not appear and then depart from the Church such as those described by John, but one who remained within the Church, took up permanent residence therein, and slowly but inexorably usurped and arrogated complete and intractable spiritual authority and control over centuries of apostasization.

Not a singular antichrist of all time (the Reformers were well aware of John's descriptions), but one who necessitated a spiritual battle of vast scope, which by God's grace and mercy was ultimately won.

The Reformation.

 

[jgr]

How fortunate I was to find information right here on Christian forums. I am not sure how to link to a post in another thread, it is post #2 from a thread "this is why I don't like GT.." Discussion in 'One Bread, One Body - Catholic' started by MoNiCa4316, Sep 22, 2008.
JoabAnias posts that the Vatican library found the original (dated more than 160 years before the Parisian version) which does NOT contain those words. Here is what he posted: Vatican Library, Reference Service. "Re: Fwd: Verifying Information." E-mail to Marno Retief. 2 June 2004.
'It is, of course, a huge mistake. With much pain and time we found the passage you are quoting in the original manuscripts (Vaticanus latinus 2583, f. 258 v; Vat. lat. 1404, f. 22 r, both from 14th century), and in both it is clearly said "Dominum nostrum Papam". The wrong formulation, "Dominum Deum nostrum Papam", we found in an edition of the end of the 16th century, but these old editions cannot be philologically trusted. The original manuscripts have the correct version, and there is no word "Deum" in that sentence.'
-----------------------------------------------------
No one knows who the forger may be, it seems improbable to me that such a word would be added accidentally. The long post also addresses another one of the anti-Catholic stories: ""It is quite certain that Popes have never approved or rejected this title 'Lord God the Pope,' for the passage in the gloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome in 1580 by Gregory XIII."

This raises far more questions than it answers, as it is comprised of a plethora of assertions which cannot be independently verified.

It is more than a little convenient to simply declare something a forgery, wash hands, and move on.

But...OK. Let's continue.

Is this accurate:

“All the names which in the Scripture are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” Robert Cardinal Bellarmine, De Conciliorum Auctoriatate (On the Authority of the Councils) Bk 2, chap. 17

 

[3 Resurrections]

The presence of the many antichrists to which John referred did not preclude the emergence of an antichrist of the unique characteristics which Paul described.

You're not addressing the line of reasoning which John employs in this I John 2:18-19 text. John was using the then-present manifestation of the many antichrists in those days to prove that the "last hour" had already arrived. That "last hour" meant the "day of Christ", and the "gathering together unto Him" that Paul spoke of in II Thess. 2:1-2. Paul had said that the Man of Lawlessness (or The Antichrist) would show up FIRST, BEFORE Christ's return. John used that quote of Paul's to prove that the "last hour" just before Christ's return was then at hand, simply because many antichrists were already in existence. Those many antichrists in that "last hour" INCLUDED the manifesting of The Antichrist, just prior to Christ's return.

 

[jgr]

You're not addressing the line of reasoning which John employs in this I John 2:18-19 text. John was using the then-present manifestation of the many antichrists in those days to prove that the "last hour" had already arrived. That "last hour" meant the "day of Christ", and the "gathering together unto Him" that Paul spoke of in II Thess. 2:1-2. Paul had said that the Man of Lawlessness (or The Antichrist) would show up FIRST, BEFORE Christ's return. John used that quote of Paul's to prove that the "last hour" just before Christ's return was then at hand, simply because many antichrists were already in existence. Those many antichrists in that "last hour" INCLUDED the manifesting of The Antichrist, just prior to Christ's return.

Not following your chronology.

When was or is the last hour / day of Christ?

 

[Original Happy Camper]

“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” {Pope Leo XIII, Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae—The Reunion of Christendom, Rome: 1894}

“The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth.” {Pope Pius V, quoted in Barclay, Cities Petrus Bertanous Chapter XXVII: 218}

“The Pope is of so great dignity, and so exalted, that he is not a mere man, but as it were God.” {Ferraris Ecclesiastical dictionary}

“It is quite certain that Popes have never disapproved or rejected this title “Lord God the Pope” for the passage in the gloss referred to appears in the edition of the Canon Law published in Rome by Gregory XIII.” {Statement from Father A. Pereira}

That is what the reformers were shown by GOD

 

[Original Happy Camper]

At least research transhumanism to see what mad scientists are doing

not trying to derail the tread but

Is the Jab part of your understanding transhumanism

 

[Original Happy Camper]

Please respond with credible evidence disproving each of these historical papal claims:


Pius IX was described as "the living Christ", and "the Lamb of the Vatican".

Pius X said: "The Pope...is Jesus Christ Himself, hidden under the veil of flesh."

Pius XI, on 30 April 1922, in the Vatican throne room, said: "You know that I am the Holy Father, the representative of God on the earth, the Vicar of Christ, which means that I am God on the earth."

The Canon Law in the Gloss on the Extravaganza of John XXII, AD 1316-1334, calls the Roman pontiff "Our Lord God the Pope."

Martin V was addressed as: "The most holy and most blessed, who holds the celestial jurisdiction, who is Lord over all the earth...the anointed...the ruler of the universe, the father of kings, the Light of the World."

During the Vatican Council, 9 January 1870, it was stated: "The Pope is Christ in office, Christ in jurisdiction and power...we bow down before thy voice, O Pius, as before the voice of Christ, the God of truth; in clinging to thee, we cling to Christ."

The Roman Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas said: "There is no difference between the Pope and Jesus Christ."

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning said: "He [the Roman pope] was elevated to be, in his Divine Master's Name, King of kings and Lord of lords."

“All the names which in the Scripture are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” Robert Cardinal Bellarmine, De Conciliorum Auctoriatate (On the Authority of the Councils) Bk 2, chap. 17 Bellarmine (1542-1621), a professor and rector at the Jesuit Gregorian University in Rome, is generally considered to have been one of the outstanding Jesuit instructors in the history of this organization.

“The pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not mere man, but as it were God, and the vicar of God. He is the divine monarch and supreme emperor, and king of kings. Hence the pope is crowned with a triple crown, as Kind of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions.” Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, vol.6, art. “Papa II” (Ferraris was an Italian Catholic canonist and consultor to the Holy Office in Rome.)

“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” Pope Leo XIII, in an encyclical letter dated June 20, 1894, The Great Encyclical Letters of Leo XIII, p. 304.

for clarity I would add this to the list

Babylon is described in Revelation 17:5 as the “mother of harlots,” which refers to apostate religious systems or churches. If the Church is the chaste woman faithful to her husband, then Babylon is the opposite: that system of worship that is unfaithful to God, has a mystery religion, and teaches and practices abominations. The harlot daughters must then represent those churches that follow her false teachings and subject themselves to her rule or, even worse, officially accept Rome’s leadership as authoritative.

Rome claims to be the mother of all the churches. At the entrance of St. John Lateran Cathedral in Rome there is a huge Latin inscription Sacrosancta Lateranensis ecclesia omnium urbis et orbis ecclesiarum mater et caput, which translated into English reads, “Sacred Lateran Church. Church mother and head of all the churches of the city and the world.”​

The Mother | Babylon | Apostate Religious Systems

Churches Agree Pope Has Overall Authority

By Oliver Poole, May 13, 1999 BBC

THE Pope was recognised as the overall authority in the Christian world by an Anglican and Roman Catholic commission yesterday which described him as a "gift to be received by all the Churches"

 

[Original Happy Camper]

I am sorry you had to endure this. I agree with you, completely. The discord in the church, Catholic vs Protestant etc., is the reason the world does not know Christ.

John 17:20 “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; 21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.

There is one Christ and one church. Unity will unlock the greatest revival the world has ever known. Unity does not mean everyone has to agree on every single point, but there should be respect and honor between brethren. Those of us in whom Christ has been revealed by the Father have become family. It is high time we act like it.

see post #67 please

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

not trying to derail the tread but

Is the Jab part of your understanding transhumanism

IMHO it is possible they can use to jab to change people against their will. No one knows what is in the syringe so it could deliver any number of things. There is an agenda afoot. Check out this thread.
They may not be fully human or human at all.

 

[Valletta]

.

 

[Valletta]

This raises far more questions than it answers, as it is comprised of a plethora of assertions which cannot be independently verified.

It is more than a little convenient to simply declare something a forgery, wash hands, and move on.

But...OK. Let's continue.

Is this accurate:

“All the names which in the Scripture are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” Robert Cardinal Bellarmine, De Conciliorum Auctoriatate (On the Authority of the Councils) Bk 2, chap. 17

I think you have lost all perspective. You have thrown out a bunch of anti-Catholic accusations that go against Catholic teaching, almost all without proper citations, that some person may have said or written 700 or maybe over a thousand years ago. I, and other Catholics have taken the time to run down so many of these unverified or flat out fabricated accusations. Of course if you can't provide who actually wrote something the best any human can do is put forth some possible explanations. For example, Thomas Aquinas supposedly said something. ..... I can show you all of the published works of Aquinas but I will never prove to your satisfaction that Aquinas supposedly never said it. Imagine if you held yourself to such standards, anyone can say anything malicious about you and it it true unless you can prove it isn't. This is not a Christian approach, it is against what the Bible tells us. If you have a question of a Catholic you need to find a document, research it yourself, and post the link to that document and I am sure Catholics will be glad to discuss if it is a real authoritative Catholic document. Try to treat others as you would have them treat you, should you be judged on your religion and your faith based upon what an unknown source wrote over a thousand years ago? Is that what defines your beliefs and your personal relationship with Jesus Christ? You should apologize to Catholics for putting out unverified malicious information.

 

[Sunshinee777]

3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God. 5 Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? 6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, 10 and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

Does the Man of Lawlessness have to be a Jew?

And the "Man of Lawlessness" will be capable of breaking every law in open public and can never be arrested right? And he will claim to be God and start a cult exalting himself and tell everyone that he is Jesus and God in human form right?

Is there any other requirements for someone to become the "Man of Lawlessness" ?

Do you believe he is a politician? Or someone we haven’t seen anywhere yet?

 

[3 Resurrections]

Not following your chronology.

When was or is the last hour / day of Christ?

The "last hour" is dated exactly when John said it was. He wrote to his readers in the first century that "...we know that IT IS the last hour". John meant that the "last hour" was currently in place as he was writing the epistle of 1 John.

If anyone has a problem with believing that very plain statement, they should remember the ridicule that Clinton received after his grand jury testimony in 1998, when he ridiculously stated, "It depends on what the definition of 'IS' is".

 

[jgr]

I think you have lost all perspective. You have thrown out a bunch of anti-Catholic accusations that go against Catholic teaching, almost all without proper citations, that some person may have said or written 700 or maybe over a thousand years ago. I, and other Catholics have taken the time to run down so many of these unverified or flat out fabricated accusations. Of course if you can't provide who actually wrote something the best any human can do is put forth some possible explanations. For example, Thomas Aquinas supposedly said something. ..... I can show you all of the published works of Aquinas but I will never prove to your satisfaction that Aquinas supposedly never said it. Imagine if you held yourself to such standards, anyone can say anything malicious about you and it it true unless you can prove it isn't. This is not a Christian approach, it is against what the Bible tells us. If you have a question of a Catholic you need to find a document, research it yourself, and post the link to that document and I am sure Catholics will be glad to discuss if it is a real authoritative Catholic document. Try to treat others as you would have them treat you, should you be judged on your religion and your faith based upon what an unknown source wrote over a thousand years ago? Is that what defines your beliefs and your personal relationship with Jesus Christ? You should apologize to Catholics for putting out unverified malicious information.

To the extent that I can determine, this is accurate:

“All the names which in the Scripture are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” Robert Cardinal Bellarmine, De Conciliorum Auctoriatate (On the Authority of the Councils) Bk 2, chap. 17

Do you agree?

 

[jgr]

The "last hour" is dated exactly when John said it was. He wrote to his readers in the first century that "...we know that IT IS the last hour". John meant that the "last hour" was currently in place as he was writing the epistle of 1 John.

If anyone has a problem with believing that very plain statement, they should remember the ridicule that Clinton received after his grand jury testimony in 1998, when he ridiculously stated, "It depends on what the definition of 'IS' is".

When did, or will, the last hour end?

 

[Valletta]

To the extent that I can determine, this is accurate:

“All the names which in the Scripture are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” Robert Cardinal Bellarmine, De Conciliorum Auctoriatate (On the Authority of the Councils) Bk 2, chap. 17

Do you agree?

No link? Whoever posts the information, website or otherwise, should put up a link so all can see which quotes are accurate and see the quotations in context. Yes, I agree with Saint Bellarmine about the Biblical terms that Bellarmine considers as being applied to Christ as per Him being head of the Church can indeed be applied to a pope. We are talking Biblical analysis, I agree with most of what the saints have said on various subjects, I may disagree with some things but in this case I am in agreement. "Shepherds" is a good example, the popes, from Peter on down, are to be shepherds.

 

[jgr]

No link? Whoever posts the information, website or otherwise, should put up a link so all can see which quotes are accurate and see the quotations in context. Yes, I agree with Saint Bellarmine about the Biblical terms that Bellarmine considers as being applied to Christ as per Him being head of the Church can indeed be applied to a pope. We are talking Biblical analysis, I agree with most of what the saints have said on various subjects, I may disagree with some things but in this case I am in agreement. "Shepherds" is a good example, the popes, from Peter on down, are to be shepherds.

From Isaiah 9:6 applied to Christ:

"...His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”

Also applied to the pope?

 

[Valletta]

From Isaiah 9:6 applied to Christ:

"...His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”

Also applied to the pope?

No, those applied to Christ as head of the Church.

 

[3 Resurrections]

When did, or will, the last hour end?

Well, that "last hour" was to end with Christ's second appearance, as Hebrews 9:26 & 28 said. "...but now once in the end of the world" (or "the consummation of the ages") "hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself...and unto them that look for him shall He appear the second time without sin unto salvation."

That "second" appearance anticipated by the Hebrews readers was also mentioned by Paul to Timothy in 2 Timothy 4:1, (written around AD 67). This was Christ's imminent appearance and judgment of the living and the dead. "I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is about to judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;" This is only one of the multiplied variety of texts describing Christ's imminent return in that first-century generation.

But the "end" of that world, or "the consummation" of those ages back then was not the end of creation or the consummation of ALL ages for fallen man's history on this planet. We know there were ages of the world which would follow that "consummation" at Christ's second appearing, because Ephesians 2:7 mentioned "the ages (plural) to come". This meant there were plural ages that would follow that particular age that Paul was then occupying in the first century.

Also, Matthew 24:21's description of the "Great Tribulation" (that was "immediately" followed by the Lord's second coming) claimed that no other tribulation period taking place in the world later on would ever be like that of the earlier "Great Tribulation". This predicted a lengthy span / plural ages of history following Christ's second appearance.

 

[jgr]

No, those applied to Christ as head of the Church.

"...all the same names are applied to the Pope."