Christian Forums

It is a wonder to me that those who are critical of the Roman Catholic Church go to such extremes of irrationality, illogic and hysterical conspiracy theories in their criticisms.  The dregs of the internet have been scraped deeply to uncover stuff that would be worthy of an X-files movie.

Such irrational and hysterical moves are sheer desperation on the part of the critics.

But why are they so desperate?  If most of the critics of the Roman Catholic Church on these boards are advocates of sola scriptura, why do they go to such extreme lengths to go outside of Scripture to attempt to tar and feather Roman Catholicism with such banal tripe?  Doesn't it stand to reason that if the Roman Catholic Church is, in fact, as thoroughly anti-Christian as these critics claim, that there would be no need to posit such questionable conspiracy theories or tenuous pagan connections, but all that need simply be done is to read and cite official Roman Catholic teaching (from the Catechism and other Catholic official documents) and make the comparisons to Scripture?

Why, it's so simple.  So, why are the critics so desparate?

I think there are two main reasons:

1) Critics of the Roman Catholic Church are, themselves, ignorant both of what the Roman Catholic Church teaches as well as ignorant of the fullness of the Scriptures. 

Most critics of the Roman Catholic Church don't even know what Rome actually teaches but rely on popular and populist bigoted propaganda.  They do not read the official Catholic documents--or, if they read them, they do not read them in full and in context, but only read the selective citations found in anti-Roman screeds--and so they really do not know that Rome doesn't actually teach many of the things they claim it does: for example, that we are to pray to Mary and the saints like we pray to God and instead of praying to God; that we cannot get to God except through Mary; that we must worship and pray to statues; and so on.

Also, most critics of the Roman Catholic Church are also ignorant of the fullness of the Scriptures.  They have focused on Romans to the exclusion of the rest of the Epistles, and so not only misread Romans, but misread the rest of the New Testament.  Therefore they explain away Jesus' command to be perfect as our father in heaven is perfect, St. Paul's admonition to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, and the effective removal of the epistle of James from the New Testament canon.  We Eastern Orthodox have a humorous quip we often pull out in doctrinal disputes: "We believe the parts of the Bible you didn't underline."  So, when we point out that we are to become partakers of the divine nature (a la 2 Peter 1:3-4), most critics are stumped.  They don't even know what that means.  They don't know what to do with 1 Corinthians 10:16-17, since they are so used to explaining away chapter 11.  And so it goes.

2. The other reason that critics of the Roman Catholic Church are so desperate is that their twofold ignorance--of Catholic doctrine and of Scripture--causes their quick if never-acknowledged defeat in arguments over doctrinal matters.  At best, such critics can hold their own but cannot win the case--the arguments appear to end in a draw.  But at their worst, since they cannot win the hard work of argumentative proof, they settle for conspiracy theories, hallucinogenic connections to the Illuminati, paganism and the Masons, and other wacky stuff.

I've got my own criticisms of Rome on other matters--I'm Eastern Orthodox after all--but I deeply sympathize with my co-religionists because it is utterly frustrating to combat the irrational.

I'm just glad few of these desperate critics have any idea what the Orthodox Church even is.

"...it is utterly frustrating to combat the irrational."


CD,

May I quote you on that?


V

Quote from: Volkmar on Sat Dec 13, 2008 - 15:05:38
"...it is utterly frustrating to combat the irrational."


CD,

May I quote you on that?


V

Only on the condition that you don't use it against me!

Such is the lot of human history, people often condemn that which they don't understand and refrain from looking into historical sources which might shed light on the issues.

However, this doesn't mean we should condemn, but rather I think it becomes more clear that we ought to reach out to them and love them anyway.  Christ calls us to love our enemies and neighbors after all.

It seems like the majority of those who are against Catholicism here only wish to scream at one another because Philosophical and Theological arument have digressed to "who can scream the loudest" rather than listening to others and talking things through.  Everyone has an opinion that they feel is right and the refusal to admit we might be wrong only keeps us screaming at each other rather than taking a step back, suggesting this might not be worth it, and instead doing something productive like sharing the love of God throughout creation.

Good observations, however.  Don't lose hope!  A little love can go a long way.

I appreciate your insight very much.  I have stated on many occasions that I do not feel compelled to "come home" based on what I have learned from the roman catholic media and from church members.   I don't think it is because I don't like to be told what to do or believe (I don't!  But that has never stopped me from growing despite the barriers).  I simply can not sign on the dotted line, promising to uphold and teach the same.    Nor would I use terms like "Antichrist" or "Beast" and so forth!  I understand tradition and I understand how changing tradition can be difficult enough without being chained to inerrancy.

Quote from: CDHealy on Sat Dec 13, 2008 - 15:08:45

Quote from: Volkmar on Sat Dec 13, 2008 - 15:05:38
"...it is utterly frustrating to combat the irrational."


CD,

May I quote you on that?


V

Only on the condition that you don't use it against me!

You got it.  No need to spike that canon.  ;o)

V

QuoteBut why are they so desperate?

Rev 18:1 And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory. 2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. 3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. 4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.


Some of them are desperate, because they do not wish to see so many perish because they have been deceived by Babylon the great.  They are following the lead of the angel in the above prophetic verses.  Time is short, most of the nations and religions of the earth have already been intoxicated with the wine of Babylon.  Including yourself, obviously.

Naw, amo, that ain't it.

Thanks for playing.

QuoteNaw, amo, that ain't it.

Thanks for playing.

I am not playing sir.  I never play with the word of God. I firmly believe the Church of Rome to be "BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH."
I truly believe that those who will not separate themselves from her abominable teachings and doctrines will be subject to the plagues which God will pour out upon those who worship the image of the beast.  Her power and influence upon the world has been ever expanding for the last two hundred years, and will climax by her manipulating the kings of the earth to set up the abomination of desolation in the place of the holy, by law.  This will bring swift judgment from God upon the earth. Upon her, and all those who supported, and did not resist the intoxicating influence of her wine.

Who else would set up the abomination of desolation, besides the one who has the golden cup filled with the abominations of the earth.  No offence intended, just the cry to "COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE, for why will ye receive of her plagues."

Quote from: Amo on Sat Dec 13, 2008 - 15:55:46I am not playing sir.  I never play with the word of God. I firmly believe the Church of Rome to be "BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH."
I truly believe that those who will not separate themselves from her abominable teachings and doctrines will be subject to the plagues which God will pour out upon those who worship the image of the beast.  Her power and influence upon the world has been ever expanding for the last two hundred years, and will climax by her manipulating the kings of the earth to set up the abomination of desolation in the place of the holy, by law.  This will bring swift judgment from God upon the earth. Upon her, and all those who supported, and did not resist the intoxicating influence of her wine.

Who else would set up the abomination of desolation, besides the one who has the golden cup filled with the abominations of the earth.  No offence intended, just the cry to "COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE, for why will ye receive of her plagues."

How could it offend, when you're interpretation is so ridiculous?  After all, Tim LaHaye doesn't think Babylon is Rome.

I happen to think Babylon is Wal-Mart.

"I happen to think Babylon is Wal-Mart."


I concur, though being a religious cur.


V

Quote from: CDHealy on Sat Dec 13, 2008 - 16:15:12

Quote from: Amo on Sat Dec 13, 2008 - 15:55:46I am not playing sir.  I never play with the word of God. I firmly believe the Church of Rome to be "BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH."
I truly believe that those who will not separate themselves from her abominable teachings and doctrines will be subject to the plagues which God will pour out upon those who worship the image of the beast.  Her power and influence upon the world has been ever expanding for the last two hundred years, and will climax by her manipulating the kings of the earth to set up the abomination of desolation in the place of the holy, by law.  This will bring swift judgment from God upon the earth. Upon her, and all those who supported, and did not resist the intoxicating influence of her wine.

Who else would set up the abomination of desolation, besides the one who has the golden cup filled with the abominations of the earth.  No offence intended, just the cry to "COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE, for why will ye receive of her plagues."

How could it offend, when you're interpretation is so ridiculous?  After all, Tim LaHaye doesn't think Babylon is Rome.

I happen to think Babylon is Wal-Mart.

What's Wal-Mart's stand on instrumental music?

They sell Guitar Hero for the Wii.  What's that tell you?

Exactly!  That's what I'm sayin'!

 There are some good people, in the RCC.

And, God wants them to come out of there whereby HE might teach them HIS ways of Salvation.

Should a christian shop at Wal-Mart?  Can a christian shop at Wal-Mart?  Can I fellowship with an errant brother (or sister) who does?  who does not?   What if I don't buy anything, just go in to witness?  What if I only buy christian stuff?   Is benadryl christian?  Can a christian take benadryl?  Does that mean he doesn't trust God?  Can a christian buy dog food there?  Should christians own dogs, especially since scripture does not particularly shed dogs in a good light?  Can christians own anything?  Can a buy a bible at Wal-Mart?  What about KMart?................... .............

Quote"I happen to think Babylon is Wal-Mart."

You are wrong.  Wal-Mart is not Babylon the great, it's just a beast.  Seriously though, you should not trifle with the word of God.  If I am silly, then I have good company, namely, just about every Protestant reformer that ever lived.  That the Church of Rome is Antichrist through it's teachings, and verily Babylon the great through the revelation of it's histroy, is a fact attested to by a great number of people.  However, all people have a right to laugh even all the way to the lake of fire, if they wish.

Rev 19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

I see.  So, you're willing to stake your faith on a brand new (comparatively) interpretation held by a distinct minority of Christians.

Sure.  I see your logic.  Go for it.

Me, I'd rather go with wisdom not hysteria.

What if I happen to think that the Babylon is the Protestant Reformation?  I don't.  But my opinion on nonbiblical, unprovable conclusions is as good as anybody elses!

Clifton,

Have you read much of Thomas Merton?  If so, what do you like or dislike about his writing?

V

Hello, Amo

Quote from: Amo on Sat Dec 13, 2008 - 17:12:27

Quote"I happen to think Babylon is Wal-Mart."

You are wrong.  Wal-Mart is not Babylon the great, it's just a beast.  Seriously though, you should not trifle with the word of God.  

I don't see the Bible says the RCC is the beast.   Most scholars and even Protestant fathers agree with me.

Quote
If I am silly, then I have good company, namely, just about every Protestant reformer that ever lived.  

Really?  I have never read this from Calvin, Zwingli, and Luther.

Quote
That the Church of Rome is Antichrist through it's teachings, and verily Babylon the great through the revelation of it's histroy, is a fact attested to by a great number of people.  However, all people have a right to laugh even all the way to the lake of fire, if they wish.

I am not in fully agreement with RCC teachings.  I do object, for example, to indulgences.  However, calling it the Antichrist is rather extreme.  Now, if the RCC supported the idea of murder, persecution, and human sacrifice, you might have something.  

Quote from: Volkmar on Sat Dec 13, 2008 - 17:17:32
Clifton,

Have you read much of Thomas Merton?  If so, what do you like or dislike about his writing?

V

Yes.

I like his earlier stuff more than his later stuff.  My priest was a novice in Gethsemani monastery when Merton was novice master.  He has since become Orthodox and has some extremely interesting things to say about Merton.

I like Waters of Siloe and another one on silence whose title escapes me.

Quote from: 3AM on Sat Dec 13, 2008 - 17:08:24
There are some good people, in the RCC.

And, God wants them to come out of there whereby HE might teach them HIS ways of Salvation.

Maybe there are some good people in the SDA Church whom God wants to come out of her?

Just a thought.

Pax.

QuoteMaybe there are some good people in the SDA Church whom God wants to come out of her?

Just a thought.

Pax.

The body of Christ consists of those of all denominations whose heart is right with God.  Those who have a daily and personal relationship with God the Father through His Son Jesus Christ, and are seeking to understand and live up to the truth at all cost.  The final touches of the gospel message to the world will transend denominationalism.  Babylon the great strives to break down all barriers between herself and all other religions through compromise of the truth, that she may lead all in rebellion against God's authority.  At the same time, all who love and seek the truth will come out of Babylon.  Thus the entire world will be divided into the two crops which will be harvested at the end of the age by Christ and His angels.  There will only be to crops when the Lord returns.  Those who are united with Babylon in worshipping the image of the first beast, and those who are true to their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ through their obedience to His Word, for He is THE WORD OF GOD, MADE FLESH.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

QuoteI don't see the Bible says the RCC is the beast.   Most scholars and even Protestant fathers agree with me.

Sorry trifecta, but I feel I must point out your ignorance concerning this matter.  Not by way of condemnation, or feelings of superiority, but only to educate concerning the truth which has been buried by those who do not want ot here it, or admit it exists.  Observe the following-


CHAP. 13 TESTIMONY OF THE REFORMERS


Unless otherwise specified, all of the following quotes are taken from the four volume series THE PROPHETIC FAITH OF OUR FATHERS by Le Roy Edwin Froom.


HILARY OF POITIERS  (300-368)

    " He [Hilary] begins by speaking the blessings of peace, which the Christians of that day could neither enjoy nor promote, beset as they were by the forerunners of Antichrist........They bear themselves not as bishops of Christ but as priests of Antichrist. This is not random abuse, but sober recognition of the fact, stated by St. John, that there are many Antichrists. For these men assume the cloak of piety, and pretend to preach the Gospel, with the one object of inducing others to deny Christ. It was the misery and folly of the day that men endeavoured  to promote the cause of God by human means and the favor of the world. Hilary asks bishops, who believe in their office, wether the Apostles had secular support when by their preaching they converted the greater part of mankind......
     " The church seeks for secular support, and in so doing insults Christ by the implication that His support is insufficient. She in her turn holds out the threat of exile and prison. It was her endurance of these that drew men to her; now she imposes her faith by violence. She craves for favors at the hand of her communicants; once it was her consecration that she braved the threatening of persecutors. Bishops in exile spread the faith; now it is she that exiles bishops. She boasts that the world loves her; the worlds hatred was the evidence that she was Christ's....... The time of Antichrist, disguised as an angel of light, has come. The true Christ is hidden from almost every mind and heart. Antichrist is now obscuring the truth that he may assert falsehood hereafter.

WALTER BRUTE  fourteenth-century British or Welsh layman and Lollard scholar.

     " Item, The said Walter hath oftentimes said, and commonly avouched, that the Pope is Antichrist, and a seducer of the people, and utterly against the Law and life of Christ,

GIROLAMO SAVONAROLA (1452-1498)  "The Roman church is full of simony and vileness.... I visualized a black cross over Babylon-Rome with the inscription: Wrath of the Lord. And it rained upon her swords and knives, lances and weapons of all kinds, as well as hailstones and brimstones in a terrible thunderstorm in deepest gloom. And I saw another cross of gold which reached from the sky over Jerusalem to the earth with the inscription: Mercy of God. And here was full sunshine. And on the strength of vision I declare again, that the Church must reform herself, and that very soon because God is angry.

PHILIPP MELANCHTHON (1497-1560)  " 18. Since it is certain that the pontiffs and the monks have forbidden marriage, it is most manifest, and true without any doubt, that the Roman Pontiff, with his whole order and kingdom, is very Antichrist.

WILLIAM TYNDALE (1484-1536)  And [they] have set up that great idol, the whore of Babylon, antichrist of Rome, whom they call pope; and have conspired against all commonwealths, and have made them a several kingdom, wherein it is lawful, unpunished, to work all abomination. (Tyndale, The Obedience of a Christian Man, in Works, vol. 1, p. 191.)

The apostles were clear-eyed, and espied antichrist at once, and put him to flight, and weeded out his doctrine quickly. But when charity waxed cold, and the preachers began to seek themselves, and to admit glory and honour of riches, then antichrist disguised himself after the fashion of a true apostle, and preached Christ wilily, bringing in now this tradition, and now that, to darken the doctrine of Christ; and set up innumerable ceremonies, and sacraments, and imagery, giving them significations at the first; but at the last, the significations laid apart, preached the work as an holy deed, to justify and put away sin, and to save the soul, that men should put their trust in works, and in whatsoever was unto his glory and profit; and under the name of Christ ministered Christ out of all together, and became head of the congregation himself.

The bishop of Rome made a law of his own, to rule his church by, and put Christ's out of the way. All the bishops swear unto the bishop of Rome, and all curates unto the bishops; but all forswear Christ and his doctrine.

But seeing John took a sign of the last day, that he saw antichrist begin, how nigh ought we to think that it is, which, after eight hundred years reigning in prosperity, see it decay again, and his falsehood to be disclosed, and him to be slain with the spirit of the mouth of Christ. (Tyndale, The Exposition of the First Epistle of St. John, in Works, vol. 2, pp. 179, 180.)

Now though the bishops of Rome and his sects give Christ these names, yet in that they rob him of the effect, and take the significations of his names unto themselves, and make of him but an hypocrite, as they themselves be, they be the right antichrists, and deny both the Father and Son. (Ibid., p. 183.)

NICHOLAS RIDLEY (1500-1555)  Yea, what fellowship hath Christ with Antichrist? Therefore is it not lawful to bear the yoke with papists. ' Come forth from among them, and separate yourselves from them, saith the Lord'.
("Conferences...Between Nicholas Ridley and Hugh Latimer,

THOMAS CRANMER (1489-1556) And as for the pope, I refuse him as Christ's enemy and antichrist, with all his false doctrines. (Cranmer, Works, vol.2, appendix, p. 566.)

I know in what office God hath placed me, and to what purpose; that is to say, to set forth his word truly unto his people, to the uttermost of my power, without respect of person, or regard of thing in the world, but of him alone. I know what account I shall make to him hereof at the last day, when every man shall answer for his vocation, and receive for the same good or ill, according as he hath done. I know how antichrist hath obscured the glory of God, and the true knowledge of his word, overcastting the same with mists and clouds of error and ignorance through false glosses and interpretations. It pitieth me to see the simple and hungry flock of Christ led into corrupt pastures, to be carried blindfold they know not wither, and to be fed with poison in the stead of wholesome meats. And moved by the duty, office, and place, whereunto it hath pleased God to call me, I give warning in his name unto all that profess Christ, that they flee far from Babylon, if they will save their souls, and to beware of that great harlot, that is to say, the pestiferous see of Rome, that she make you not drunk with her pleasant wine. (Cranmer, Works, vol. 1, pp. 6,7.)

After all these sprung up the pope, that tripled crown monster, and great antichrist, which took upon him authority, not only over the clergy, but also climbed above kings and emperors, deposing them at his pleasure, and settled himself in the temple of God, that is, in the consciences of men, extolling himself above God, dispensing with good laws, and giving men leave to break them, and to regard more his decrees than the everlasting commandments of God. (Ibid., vol. 2, p. 15.)

And in the seventeenth chapter he lively setteth forth the pope in his own colours, under the person of the whore of Babylon being drunken with the blood of saints; pointing, as it were with his finger, who this whore of Babylon is, and the place where she shall reign, saying: 'The woman which thou sawest is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth.' Now what other city reigned at that time, or at any time since, over the christian kings of the earth, but only Rome? Whereof it followed 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. (Ibid., pp. 62, 63.)

Not content herewithal, more insolent than Lucifer, [the Pope] hath occupied not only the highest place in this world above kings and princes, but hath further presumed to sit in the seat of Almighty God.  Which only he reserved to himself, which is the conscience of man; and to keep the possession thereof, he hath promised forgiveness of sins totiens quotiens.

"He hath brought in gods of his own framing, and invented a new religion, full of gain and lucre, quite contrary to the doctrine of the holy scripture, only for the maintaining of his kingdom, displacing Christ from his glory, and holding his people in a miserable servitude of blindness, to the loss of a great number of souls, which God at the latter day shall exact at his hand: boasting many times in his canons and decrees, that he can dispense contra Petrum, contra Paulum, contra vetus et novum Testamentum; and that he, plenitudine potestatis, tantum potest quantum Deus; that is, 'Against Paul, against the old and new Testament; and of the fulness of power may do as much as God.'  O Lord, who ever heard such blasphemy?  If there be any man that can advance himself above him, let him be judged antichrist.

This enemy of God and of our redemption is so evidently painted out in the scriptures, by such manifest signs and tokens, which all so clearly appear in him, that, except a man will shut up his eyes and heart against the light, he cannot but know him: and therefore, for my part, I will never give my consent to the receiving of him into this church of England, and you, my lord, and the rest that sit here in commission, consider well and examine your own  consciences: you have sworn against him: you are learned, and can judge of the truth.  I pray God you be not willfully blind.  As for me, I have herein discharged mine own conscience toward the world, and I will write also my mind to her grace (Queen Nary), touching this matter.

Edwin Sandys (1519-1588) He that sitteth in the temple of God, and termeth himself Christ's vicar, doth in like sort offer unto the people bread, water, wine, milk, pardon of sins, grace, mercy, and eternal life; but not freely: he is a merchant, he giveth nothing, and that is nothing which he selleth. For although he make large promises to the buyer, he selleth that which he hath not to deliver. 'Eternal life is the gift of God.' The pope therefore selleth but wind and smoke for fire, shadows for truths: he deceiveth the buyers with false slights, false measures, false weights. Beware of this merchant, lose not your labour, cast not away your money: it is not meat but poison which he offereth you. His physic cannot heal your diseases; his holy water cannot wash away the spots of a sullied and defiled soul, as he untruly would bear you in hand; his blasphemous masses do not appease, but provoke God's wrath; they cannot benefit the quick, much less the dead, which either need no help, or are past all help; his rotten relics cannot comfort you; his blind, dumb, and worm-eaten idols can do you no good. It is cast away which is spent upon his shameless pardons; they will not prevail-God will not admit them: by his Latin service ye cannot be edified, or made wiser. Yet this trumpery they sell for money, and upon this trash they cause silly men to waste their substance, and to these to commit their souls. Thus you see a manifest difference between Christ and antichrist. (Edwin Sandys, The Sermons of Edwin Sandys, pp. 11,12.)

Christ is obscured by that great enemy antichrist, 'the man of sin,' who hath set himself in Christ's peculiar place, and will be 'exalted above all that is called God.' To make any other mediator between God and man, saving only Christ Jesus which is not only man, but also God; to seek elsewhere remission of sins, justification, redemption, sanctification, or salvation, that only in this Jesus, and in him crucified, doth darken and make dim both him and his merits. And of the treason the Romish antichristian church, which they term catholic, is found guilty. For the children of this harlot labour by all means to obscure the Son of God, to rob him of the glory of his deserts in our salvation. (Ibid., pp. 358,359.)

We do utterly abandon this usurped and proud authority: we have happily forsaken that synagogue of Satan.

This is our apostasy. We have forsaken him that hath forsaken God, and whom God hath forsaken: we have left that man of sin, that rose-colored harlot with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, that triple-crowned beast, that double-sworded tyrant, that thief and murderer, who hath robbed so many souls of salvation, and sucked so much innocent blood of christian martyrs, that adversary unto Christ, that pretensed vicar, who hath displaced the person, not only taking upon him Christ's room and office, but also boasting himself as if he were a god, and being content of his parasites so to be called. This wicked man of sin is at length revealed by the sincere preaching of the gospel. Daniel in his prophecies, Paul in his epistles, and John in his revelations, have most lively described and pointed hin forth even as it were with the finger. Yea, through his pride and ambition, his usurping authority and worldly rule, his tyrrany and persecuting of Christ in his members, he hath sufficiently revealed and detected himself, if none had done it for him. (Ibid., p. 389.)

William Fulke (1538-1589) The see being found, it is easy to find the person by S. Paul's description; and this note especially, that excludeth the heathen tryants, 'He shall sit in the temple of God:' which when we see to be fulfilled in the Pope, although none of the eldest fathers could see it, because it was performed after their death, we nothing doubt to say and affirm still, that the Pope is that 'Man of sin,' and 'Son of perdition,' the adversary that lifteth up himself 'above all that is called God;' and shall be destroyed 'by the spirit of the Lord's mouth, and by the glory of His coming. (William Fulke, A Discovery of the Dangerous Rock of the Popish Church, in Works, vol.2 p. 373.)

And concerning the usurped power of the bishop of Rome, which he most wrongfully challengeth, as the successor of Christ and Peter, we may easily perceive how false, feigned, and forged it is, not only in that it hath no sufficient ground in holy Scripture, but also by the fruits and doctrine thereof. For our Saviour Christ and St. Peter teach, most earnestly and agreeably, obedience to kings, as to the chief and supreme rulers in this world next under God; but the bishop of Rome teaches, that they that are under him are free from all burdens and charges of the commonwealth and obedience towards their prince, most clearly against Christ's doctrine and St. Peter's. He ought therefore rather to be called Antichrist and the successor of the Scribes abd Pharisees, than Christ's vicar or St. Peter's successor. ("An Exhortation Concerning Good Order and Obedience To Rulers and Magistrates

JOHN KNOX (1505-1572)  First, then, not only are all the impious traditions and ceremonies of the papists taken away, but also that tyranny which the pope himself has for so many ages exercised over the church, is altogether abolished; and it is provided that all persons shall in the future acknowledge him to be the very antichrist, and son of perdition, of whom Paul speaks.

The mass is abolished, as being an accursed abomination and a diabolical profanation of the Lord's supper; and it is forbidden to all persons in the whole kingdom of Scotland either to celebrate or hear it. (The Zurich Letters [1st series], 1558-1579, p. 199.)

As for your Romane Church, as it is now corrupted, and the Authority thereof, wherein stands the hope of your Victory, I no more doubt but that it is the Synagogue of Sathan; and the head thereof, called the Pope, to be that man of Sin of whom the Apostle speaketh, then that I doubt that Jesus Christ suffered by the procurement of the visible Church of Jerusalem. Yea, I offer myself by word or writing, to prove the Romane Church this day farther to degenerate from the purity which was in the dayes of the Apostles, then was the Church of the Jewes from the ordinance given by Moses, when they consented to the innocent death of Jesus Christ. These words were spoken in the open audience of the Parish Church of Saint Andrews, after the said Dean John had spoken what it pleased him, and had refused to dispute. (Knox, The Historie of the Reformatioun of Religioun Within the Realm of Scotland, book 1, pp. 75, 76.)

As far as I am concerned I am absolutely convinced, that whatever is done in the Roman church is contradictory to Christ's blessed rule, and is nothng else than a lethal poison; and whosoever drinks of it drinks death and damnation to himself.......

The malice of your bishops is only to evident, their impure lives contaminate the very air; the innocent blood they shed cries to God for vengeance; the idolatry and abominations they with impunity commit perverts and defiles the whole country. And none amongst you has the courage to do away with these villainies. Will not God consider you guilty? Do not decieve yourselves, dear bretheren. Do not sleep in your sins, for vengeance is near to all the disobedient. Flee from Babel, if you do not want to partake in her destruction. (Translated from Brandes, op. cit., p. 494.)

JOHN NAPIER  (NEPER)  (1550-1617)  In the former proposition was described the holie Spouse of Christ, here is to bee described the filthie whoore of Sathan, there that Ladie, who is adorned with the Sunne, Starres, and heavenlie virtues: here that Adultresse, who glories in golde, silver, precious stones, and worllie pleasures: there shee, who is persecuted by the Dragon, here she unto whome the Dragon doeth give authoritie: There she, who is chaced into the wilderness, and hath no lodge to hide her in; here she who impireth above all people, and is the Metropolitane citie of the world. And finallie, seeing in al things this Whoore, or whoorish Babylon, is contrarious to Christes holie Spouse, lette us, and all Christians trie her out, as our detestable and deadlie enemie, and see what Babylon she is. We say then, that this Babylon, is not that reall Babylon of Chaldee, but Rome, for these reasons. First, for that this Babylon is called mysterium Babylon, that is to say, mysticall or figurative Babylon: Therefore, it is not Babylon it self in Chaldee. (John Napier, A Plaine Discovery of the Whole Revelation of Saint Iohn., p. 34. This first reason was supported by a series of supplemental arguments.)

For firste (saieth the text) the Woman that sate upon this Beast, is the great Citie, that sitteth over the Kings of the earth: So the chiefe seate and citie of the Latine or Romane Empire, is that great citie Rome, that had Empire overe all the kingdomes of the earth. Secondly, saith Daniel, there shal foure chief kingdomes arise upon the earth, under the figure of foure beastes: Whereof (by plaine interpretation hee saith) the fourth beast that had these ten horns, is the fourth kingdome of the earth: And so it is, that the firste greate kingdome or Monarchie being the Babylonians: The seconde, of the Medes and Persians: The thirde, of the Graecians. The fourth and laste, is certainlie the Monarchie of the Latines or Romanes:and therefore, that fourth beaste which both there in Daniel, & here in Iohns Revelation, hath ten horns, must necessarily be the Romane or Latine Empire. (Ibid., pp. 36,37; and introductory table.)

Cotton Mather (1663-1728) (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 (1703-1791) (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.

Continued in next post-

SECOND SCOTCH CONFESSION OF FAITH  In special, we detest and refuse the usurped authoritie of that Romane Antichrist upon the scriptures of God, upon the Kirk, the civill Magistrate, and consciences of men. (Philip Schaff, Creeds, vol. 3, p. 481.)

The statement from the Westminster Confession of Faith of the Church of England, which was later used by the Presbyterians, is significant:
There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ, nor 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. (The Westminster Confession of Faith, Section 6, chapter 25)

Irish Articles of Faith (adopted in 1615): "The Bishop of Rome...be that 'man of sin', foretold in the holy Scriptures."

Westminster Confession of Faith: "The Pope of Rome...is that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ."

Savoy Declaration: "The Pope of Rome...is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition."

Baptist Confession 1688: "The Pope of Rome...is no other than Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition."

The Waldensian treatise titled the Noble Lesson, dated 1100 A.D., stated: "Antichrist, the predicted murderer of the Saints, hath already appeared in his true character, seated monarchally in the seven-hilled city." In 1120 or 1160 A.D., A Treatise Concerning Antichrist identified the Pope of Rome as the Antichrist. George Faber identifies this as a production of Peter the Valdo (Faber, pp. 379-384).

In 1206, the Albigenses made the following confession: "That the Church of Rome was not the spouse of Christ, but the Church of confusion, drunk with the blood of the martyrs. That the polity of the Church of Rome was neither good nor holy, nor established by Jesus Christ" (Peter Allix, The Ecclesiastical History of the Ancient Churches of the Albigenses, 1821 edition, first published in 1692, p. 178).

Please forgive this major overkill of information.  I am just so very sure that so very few today truly know or understand at all what the vast majority of Protestant reformers believed regarding the church of Rome.  It is a history that has been, and is being trashed.  When we forget the lessons of the past, we repeat the mistakes of the same.  The negative history of the Church of Rome is being systematically removed from public view so that all the world will once again receive the leadership of the Papacy with open arms.

Amo, I could post just as many quotes by probably just as many Roman Catholics who taught that Protestantism was/is the Beast of Babylon from Revelation. So who's right?

Such un-Christian name-calling does nothing to further the cause of Christ.

No denomination on earth has any right to judge another's servant (cf Rom. 14, esp.  vs. 4). Before I start slamming another demonination and basically equating them with Satan I'd wanna be really sure my own denomination was spotless first. But mine isn't. I'd not like to stand before God and have to explain how, rather than get my own house in order, I wasted time knocking somebody else's. I don't have that luxury.

The Catholic Church of 1517 isn't the same Catholic Church of 2008. There have been many reforms enacted since then. I mean they've had, what, the Council of Trent and two Vatican Councils since then. Plus, Roman Catholics and Protestants have been engaging in ecumenical dialogue for thirty or forty years.

John was not referring to the Roman Catholic Church when he wrote about the Great Beast. If I wanted to, I could prove from Revelation that John was referring to McDonalds, Hasbro Toys, or the Center for Public Broadcasting as the Beast of Babylon when he wrote Revelation. That would make about as much sense as saying he meant the Roman Catholic Church or America. We've got to stop twisting scripture to prove our pre-conceived ideas. We need to let scripture speak to us instead of the other way 'round.

Pax.

I would just like to point out that the term "anti-Christ" means against Christ and considering the Roman Church is not against Christ, in fact they hold Christ's sacrifice on the cross as the greatest gift God could give mankind and central to all their worship, calling the Roman Church the beast is, once again, a rediculous claim.  Taking texts from various Bishops, Cardinals, and Popes, using them out of context, and also relying on a vague interpretation of Revelations that has never been accepted in Church history up until the last hundred years or so is not only irresponsible, it's also hateful and contradictory to the love Christ commanded us to share with one another.

The Roman Church does not always agree with the various Bishops, Cardinals, and Popes of the past.  That is why they go back and fix problematic dogmas and doctrines of the Church periodically.  They recognize themselves as an institution founded in Scripture and Tradition coming from Jesus and his followers, but also as an organization that is run by mankind and thus doomed to the very same failings of all humanity.  What's more, it seems like various individuals feel that simply quoting scripture and texts without any research into their context, history, or perhaps even examining the entire document they came from is responsible research into church history and whatever interpretation they deem fitting is 'the only' interpretation available.  Again, this is irresponsible behavior ironically born from Derrida's presuposition that truth is prone to multiple interpretations but can still be truth.  There is such a thing as interpreting well, which again, requires proper context and historical understanding to be taken into account.  Various doctrines have come from necessity during particular times of history and when put in their right context, can later be applied to modern culture to see if they are still noteworthy, beneficial, or scripturally sound.  When taken out of context, they can be twisted or manipulated to say anything an individual pleases and is often contrary to what the author originally intended.

Finally, interpretaions of Revelation are varied and no one really can know for certain what is meant to come.  What is certain is that using Revelation against the church body of Christ is not only irresponsible, it is unfortunate and hateful.  As pointed out by a multitude of others the exact same chapter could be used to interpret a plethora of other institutions as "the beast" and a multitude of others as "the anti-Christ".  Once again, this entire thread is an example of the mindset that "whoever screams the loudest wins an argument" rather than actual productive dialogue in sharing ideas.  How about instead of simply continuing to misquote various texts and documents, we consider the possibility of humility and the fact that we can be wrong?

Instead of getting indignant and taking things personally , why don't we open our hearts to our brothers and sisters who are insisting again and again that they do in fact believe in Christ, that their Church is in fact a Christian institution but also a man-run institution and prone to being wrong, and that rather than telling people what they "really" feel or believe we can seek community in our differences and similarities and perhaps work towards a better goal, like sharing the message of Christ with others or even simply loving one another?