Is the number 666 associate with papacy?

[FathersKnowBest]

Read the article and it takes Christ’s words and convoluted them to justify a doctrine for which there’s no word from Christ.

Fine; you take all the scriptures fully literally. Except where you don’t.

I believe Christ meant exactly what He meant when he said “call no man father”, and I don’t think anyone needs to explain it, unless the agenda is to alter it. Some feel the need to find some way to say Christ didn’t really mean what he said. But I think the word is clear.

Scripture, according to scripture, is easily misunderstood and distorted.
2Pe 3:16 speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures.

Now, I’m not calling you “ignorant” in any pejorative sense. In fact, I find that a bad translation given the connotation that the word has acquired in recent times. Since the word in Greek is amathes, it literally translates to “un-discipled.” In other words, not schooled in Apostolic teaching.

But my point is that anyone who says scripture is “clear” is going against scripture. Hmmm …

God’s word is clear enough for all to read and understand. The Holy Spirit will guide us into all truth, men can only cooperate, but it’s the Spirit who teaches, that’s what Christ said.

Sorry, that’s not quite right. When Jesus said that, who was He addressing? Everyone? No. Those present were His Apostles, at the Last Supper. In other words, the leaders of the nascent Church.

So, understanding that the Catholic Faith doesn’t conflict in any way with Scriptures, we believe that the Holy Spirit guides “us” into all Truth, the “us” being His Church, collectively, and not necessarily individually unless it comports with what the Holy Spirit has guided the Church to believe.

The early church appointed bishops, which is to say “overseer”. Sure, church leadership should be overseers, guarding the flock, but the title father and Holy Father belongs to Christ only. None of the disciples were addressed as father or Holy Father.

St. John addresses Church leaders in Ephesis as “fathers” TWICE (1 John 2:13-14).

And, of course, there are many many other examples.

I’ll ignore the parts about calling the Pope “Holy Father” since it’s just a strawman.

The earthly ministry of the sanctuary was transferred to heaven. We have no need for a pope because the Vicar of Christ is the Holy Spirit, but if any man wants to take that position, they must first temove the Holy Spirit from that position.

I believe that the Holy Spirit is, in a sense, the Vicar of Christ as well. But where is that belief rooted?

 

[arga]

Ellen White is the foundation of the SDA faith Traverse…
…This is why SDA’s are forced to swear fealty to Ellen White prior to officially joining the SDA Church.
…Have you looked at their fundamental beliefs as listed on their official website?

First of all, we don’t swear. Second, please read the statement and what it says about what all truths must be tested by.

One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White. As the Lord’s messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.

Please note what the purpose of her writings are: comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. It’s part of our fundamental beliefs upon membership only because why would you want to join a church if you don’t know our entire background? But not believing her writings is not a cause for losing your soul, while not believing whatever the pope says is to go against God himself. If you actually read the visions, tell me how they undermine the scriptures. Please don’t confuse the visions with the understanding the membership had through Bible study. Because she wrote on the understanding they had of the Scriptures at the time as well, and those are not infallible. There part of the history of the advent movement, but we don’t claim that their rejection is a ticket to hell.

Her writings never were or ever will be a source of authority to teach doctrine. Now the papacy, as an institution, on the contrary does take upon itself the authority to change God’s Word and doctrines, it’s saying his words are equal to God’s. Again the pope is considered the Holy Father, capital not lower case F, which has no Scripture proof. EW and her contemporaries, by contrast, say that nothing is equal to God’s Words. The only way in which the papacy retains it’s power over the membership is based on traditions that men ordained many years after the disciples of Christ had died and without the authority of the Scriptures. The leader of the true church of God has always been and always will be the Invisible God — the Holy Spirit.

 

[Porknpie]

One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White. As the Lord’s messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.

Couple thoughts here Arga. Did she ever test the Spirits as the bible says to do? She proclaims a different gospel than what the apostles taught. Not believing in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist would be an example…with Sunday as the day of Christian gathering and worship.

You say that she is an authoritative source of truth but then you pick and choose what to believe saying that you are not bound to believe everything that she said.

Do we have the same definition of authoritative?

authoritative: able to be trusted as being accurate or true; reliable.

Please note what the purpose of her writings are: comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction.

Where in the bible does it say to listen to another prophet beyond the death of St. John? Why would scripture record that Jesus would lead his Church to ALL TRUTH…then fail…and need Ellen White to set the record straight?

It’s part of our fundamental beliefs upon membership only because why would you want to join a church if you don’t know our entire background? But not believing her writings is not a cause for losing your soul, while not believing whatever the pope says is to go against God himself.

Not quite, only when the Pope is speaking infallibly on an matter of faith and morals to the whole church, in unison with the Bishops.

If you actually read the visions, tell me how they undermine the scriptures. Please don’t confuse the visions with the understanding the membership had through Bible study. Because she wrote on the understanding they had of the Scriptures at the time as well, and those are not infallible. There part of the history of the advent movement, but we don’t claim that their rejection is a ticket to hell.

Catholics don’t claim you are going to hell. How do you know who is going to hell? I believe I asked you this in an earlier post. The Written Word of God says that we are not to judge.

Her writings never were or ever will be a source of authority to teach doctrine. Now the papacy, as an institution, on the contrary does take upon itself the authority to change God’s Word and doctrines, it’s saying his words are equal to God’s.

The papacy is an office, created by Christ himself. St. Peter was the first pope, given authority by Christ as was given to Christ by the Father, to feed the sheep, and bind and loosen on earth what would be bound and loosen in heaven. Doctrines are the teachings handed down by the apostolic faith through time. As a SDA, you do not believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. This doctrine was established by Christ, it’s his Words, yet you disbelieve. Not unlike the Jews and many of Christ’s followers of the day. Jesus did not correct them rather he let them go. Read John 6.

Again the pope is considered the Holy Father, capital not lower case F, which has no Scripture proof.

Where in scripture does scripture say that it holds all of the Christian faith? It must say it for it to be true. Rather, what does the Word of God say? St. Paul says to hold fast to what you have been taught, both by the spoken Word and by Letter. BOTH. You conveniently ignore scripture where in conflicts with your beliefs.

The only way in which the papacy retains it’s power over the membership is based on traditions that men ordained many years after the disciples of Christ had died and without the authority of the Scriptures.

How many years was this Arga? Be specific. Let’s then compare what the early Church believed, those closest in time to Christ and the apostles to what the SDA Church believes, including Ellen White.

I wait your answer on how many years this was.

 

[Porknpie]

Arga -

Here is my earlier post that you did not reply to. Justin Martyr describes the Catholic Mass in the early second century. Where-ever the apostles went, they taught the newly turned Christians the amazing gift Christ gave us. The bible and Tradition is clear here yet you disbelieve. Do you believe like the Mormon’s do that there was an apostasy in the early Church? Christ taught all his apostles & disciples and they all got it wrong?? Interesting it is, that there never was an controversy about the Eucharist in the early Church, heretics aside.

Arga -

Below are the words of Justin Martyr writing in the early second century.

No one may share the Eucharist with us unless he believes that what we teach is true, unless he is washed in the regenerating waters of baptism for the remission of his sins, and unless he lives in accordance with the principles given us by Christ.

We do not consume the eucharistic bread and wine as if it were ordinary food and drink, for we have been taught that as Jesus Christ our Savior became a man of flesh and blood by the power of the Word of God, so also the food that our flesh and blood assimilates for its nourishment becomes the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus by the power of his own words contained in the prayer of thanksgiving.

The apostles, in their recollections, which are called gospels, handed down to us what Jesus commanded them to do. They tell us that he took bread, gave thanks and said: Do this in memory of me. This is my body. In the same way he took the cup, he gave thanks and said: This is my blood. The Lord gave this command to them alone. Ever since then we have constantly reminded one another of these things. The rich among us help the poor and we are always united. For all that we receive we praise the Creator of the universe through his Son Jesus Christ and through the Holy Spirit.

On Sunday we have a common assembly of all our members, whether they live in the city or the outlying districts. The recollections of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as there is time. When the reader has finished, the president of the assembly speaks to us; he urges everyone to imitate the examples of virtue we have heard in the readings. Then we all stand up together and pray.

On the conclusion of our prayer, bread and wine and water are brought forward. The president offers prayers and gives thanks to the best of his ability, and the people give assent by saying, “Amen”.** The eucharist is distributed, everyone present communicates, and the deacons take it to those who are absent.**

The wealthy, if they wish, may make a contribution, and they themselves decide the amount. The collection is placed in the custody of the president, who uses it to help the orphans and widows and all who for any reason are in distress, whether because they are sick, in prison, or away from home. In a word, he takes care of all who are in need.

We hold our common assembly on Sunday because it is the first day of the week, the day on which God put darkness and chaos to flight and created the world, and because on that same day our savior Jesus Christ rose from the dead. For he was crucified on Friday and on Sunday he appeared to his apostles and disciples and taught them the things that we have passed on for your consideration.

Justin Martyr records the order of the Catholic mass above (gathering on Sunday, readings, a Homily, prayer, the Eucharist and a monetary collection for the needy). And Justin Martyr records that the apostles taught their descendants what Jesus Christ taught them: of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist and that Sunday is the day of gathering for the Christians. The apostles were taught by Christ himself. For 2,000 years, Catholic East and West, and Orthodox have believed the same.

PnP

 

[arga]

I do honestly want to know, and I’m all eyes, please enlighten me, don’t give me links to read. You, as a Catholic, tell me why you believe this and what is the Scriptural authority you use to support these beliefs in spite of what we believe the scripture says.

Q. Who is the Holy Father or Pope?
A. The Holy Father or Pope is the Visible Head of the Church, the Successor of St. Peter and the Vicar of Christ on Earth.

This is my problem with this: Capital Holy Father, Head, and Vicar. When Christ clearly says his representative or Vicar is the Holy Spirit.

1​

John 14:16-17 - And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth.
John 15:26 - But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me.
John 16:7, 8, 13 - Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment… Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is come… he will guide you into all truth… He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

So clearly the only Vicar Christ mentioned would come in his behalf is the Holy Spirit. I find nowhere else in Scripture any other Vicar, capital V.

2​

Who is the Visible Head of the Church?

Ephesians 5:23 - For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church.
Speaking of Christ, Colossians 1:15, 16, 18 - Who is the image of the invisible God… For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible… all things were created by him, and for him. And he is the head of the body, the church

So by this, it’s clear that the Apostle teaches that Christ is the Image of the invisible God — The Holy Spirit. And that Christ is The Head of the Church, not Paul, not Peter, not John.

3​

Who is the Holy Father?

Christ in prayer said “And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.” John 17:11

And again Matthew 23:9 - “call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.”

It’s obvious that Christ here is not referring to our earthly carnal fathers, lower case “f”, but to the Heavenly Holy Father, capital F, a title which the Papacy institution claims as theirs, and which they also claimed belonged to St. Peter, though no one ever called Peter Holy Father.

So please explain the basis of your belief in the Pope as the Holy Father. I honestly do seek to understand because the origin of Protestantism traces back to the fact the Scriptures appear to contradict many Catholic dogmas such as the appropriation of a divine title to a man — Holy Father or Pope.

I mean, the papacy:

• sits on God’s temple showing himself to be God (Holy Father)
• his words are equal to God’s
• he is worshiped and all must bow to him as they do to God
  2 Thessalonians 2:1-7 comes to mind for many of us.

I don’t think it’s unfair to give non-Catholics honest seekers and Bible students a good explanation.

 

[Porknpie]

Arga,

The OT prophesies about the Eucharist.

Malachi 1

11 For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.

Christ is the only pure offering over made and in every place, all over the world, 24 hours a day, the Mass is celebrated.

Does the SDA Church use incense?

Guess which Church does!

PnP

 

[arga]

Arga -

Here is my earlier post that you did not reply to. Justin Martyr describes the Catholic Mass in the early second century. Where-ever the apostles went, they taught the newly turned Christians the amazing gift Christ gave us. The bible and Tradition is clear here yet you disbelieve. Do you believe like the Mormon’s do that there was an apostasy in the early Church? Christ taught all his apostles & disciples and they all got it wrong?? Interesting it is, that there never was an controversy about the Eucharist in the early Church, heretics aside.

You know, all this is nice and well, and the Scriptures confirm that they did gather on the first day of the week to break bread and do many other things.

Acts 20:7 — And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.
1 Corinthians 16:1-2 — Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.

Nothing wrong with breaking bread and sharing hospitality and doing works of charity. In fact, if we could do it everyday there would be nothing wrong with that either. Now as far as the saint’s explanation of the Eucharist, what’s the point you’re trying to explain? Why Adventists believe the Sabbath is still the day to be kept holy instead of Sunday? or that the only way to keep the Eucharist is by attending the Church gathering on Sunday because in it Christ resurrected and also because it’s the day that light was made?

To me, any day is good to worship God, any day is good to part take in Holy Communion, take note that the day in which Christ and His disciples took communion first was a Thursday evening. So if we want to establish tradition in a strict manner, then we should follow what Christ and his apostles did, which is communion on Thursday evenings by their example. But the truth is communion goes farther than just a day, it’s a solemn ritual not linked to any day of the week.

By what the saint says in the writing you posted, what’s important is that Christians partake of it. If Christ wanted an emphasis on the day more than the act, then he would have set a day for it. The Eucharist then is about the ritual, not the day.

As far as the day to worship, we can worship God everyday, but we cannot keep every day holy. While the scriptures have two records of the first day Sunday as a day white they broke bread, studied the scriptures, and gathered charity, there’s no record of the day being kept holy. Neither Jesus nor the apostles change the Sabbath commandment from keeping Sabbath holy to keeping Sunday holy. Keeping Sunday holy is indeed a tradition instituted much later. And of this, I’m sure well studied Catholics are very familiar, because you have the records that say that to keep the Sabbath holy is to Judaize the Christian converts.

 

[arga]

Arga,

The OT prophesies about the Eucharist.

Malachi 1

11 For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.

Christ is the only pure offering over made and in every place, all over the world, 24 hours a day, the Mass is celebrated.

Does the SDA Church use incense?

Guess which Church does!

PnP

So Malachi talks about two things here, incense and offerings.

Incense in according to the Scriptures is symbolical of the prayers of the saints. Incense was offered inside the Earthly Sanctuary by the Israelite High Priest in front of the Arc of the Covenant of God. But now Christ himself is our High Priest ministering the real incense before His father’s throne? See

Hebrews 8:1-2 — We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

Hebrews 9:1-4 — Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary. For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary. And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all; Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant.

Revelation 5:8 — golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

Revelation 8:4 — And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel’s hand.

While rituals are fine, we’ve to keep in mind more Who they represent — Christ. Otherwise we may fall in the same error of the Pharisees of doing rituals without recognizing the Savior whom the lamb represented. So incense was fine, but the meaning is more important. To answer the question, no we don’t burn incense in the church, we pray, which is what the incense represents, but I will not condemn anyone for using incense in their worship service if it helps them visualize Christ more clearly. It’s a fine symbolic representation ordained by God for the earthly sanctuary.

As far as the pure offering, we Christians don’t sacrifice lambs and goats either. We offer our hearts and good works as offerings.

Psalm 40:6 — Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.

David by this implies that obedience is really the best offering we can give God. 1 Samuel 15:22 — Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

So just like the offerings were symbolical of Christ sacrifice and we don’t need to kill and burn any more lambs, the incense is also symbolical of prayer and we don’t need to burn it in earthly sanctuaries any more. It’s just a ritual. Christ already fulfilled the sacrifice offerings and he is currently fulfilling the incense symbology as well, but in the heavenly Sanctuary. That’s how we understand it. Is burning or not burning incense a sin? I don’t think so. Is not praying a sin? Yes, because Christ commanded us to pray, therefore not praying will eventually cause a separation between God and us, plus it’s a command, not an option.

 

[arga]

According to the Scriptures the Holy Spirit communicated teachings via the Church ( God’s appointed religious Authority )…
…Prophets don’t establish doctrine - they remind or rebuke people from drifting away from them.
…Ellen claimed God established doctrine through her - this is alien to Scripture.

The Church, not the pope.

And EW did not claim God established doctrine through her. Read the Adventist belief, it was for comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. Never ever to establish doctrine. We hold that God’s Word establishes doctrine. The papacy claim it is able to establish and change doctrine because their word is equal to God’s.

 

[Pythons]

First of all, we don’t swear.

You certainly had to “swear fealty” to Ellen White to be baptized into the SDA Church…
…Unless those fundamental beliefs aren’t fundamental and a person can opt-out of the ones they don’t agree with.
…What is it?

arga:

Second, please read the statement and what it says about what all truths must be tested by.

It serves no purpose for the fundamental belief of Ellen White being a source of authority to be tested by Scripture…
…When Scripture is EXPLICIT that Christ had ZERO possibility of committing vice ( sinning ).
…And Ellen White was almost feverish in affirming Christ ‘could have’ sinned & subsequently been eternally annihilated by ‘God’.

This is exactly the reason SDA’s shun the Creed & refuse to say it in Church…
…Because the Creed is clear that anyone who affirms Christ could have sinned is anathema.
…The Creed states this because Sacred Scripture states this more than literally any other thing it affirms.

arga:

One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White. As the Lord’s messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.

That bolded part sounds pretty similar to:

2 Timothy 3,15
And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

What you appear to be saying is that Ellen White’s teachings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth…
…That provide “the same thing” Scripture provides - only Ellen White said God didn’t get it quite right about the possibility of Christ failing.
…Evidently Arius got it right though.

arga:

Please note what the purpose of her writings are: comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. It’s part of our fundamental beliefs upon membership only because why would you want to join a church if you don’t know our entire background? But not believing her writings is not a cause for losing your soul, while not believing whatever the pope says is to go against God himself. If you actually read the visions, tell me how they undermine the scriptures. Please don’t confuse the visions with the understanding the membership had through Bible study. Because she wrote on the understanding they had of the Scriptures at the time as well, and those are not infallible. There part of the history of the advent movement, but we don’t claim that their rejection is a ticket to hell.

Her writings never were or ever will be a source of authority to teach doctrine. Now the papacy, as an institution, on the contrary does take upon itself the authority to change God’s Word and doctrines, it’s saying his words are equal to God’s. Again the pope is considered the Holy Father, capital not lower case F, which has no Scripture proof. EW and her contemporaries, by contrast, say that nothing is equal to God’s Words. The only way in which the papacy retains it’s power over the membership is based on traditions that men ordained many years after the disciples of Christ had died and without the authority of the Scriptures. The leader of the true church of God has always been and always will be the Invisible God — the Holy Spirit.

There is rock solid backing in Scripture for the Papacy arga…
…Around as much as there is that the teaching that Christ could have failed is of the antichrist power.

 

[Pythons]

The Church, not the pope.

And EW did not claim God established doctrine through her. Read the Adventist belief, it was for comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. Never ever to establish doctrine. We hold that God’s Word establishes doctrine. The papacy claim it is able to establish and change doctrine because their word is equal to God’s.

Ok, how do you explain this then?

Ellen White, 3SM 32.1
At that time one error after another pressed in upon us; ministers and doctors brought in new doctrines. We would search the Scriptures with much prayer, and the Holy Spirit would bring the truth to our minds. Sometimes whole nights would be devoted to searching the Scriptures and earnestly asking God for guidance. Companies of devoted men and women assembled for this purpose. The power of God would come upon ME, and I was enabled clearly to define what is truth and what is error. As the points of our faith were thus established, our feet were placed upon a solid foundation. We accepted the truth point by point, under the demonstration of the Holy Spirit.** I** would be taken off in vision, and explanations would be given me. I was given illustrations of heavenly things, and of the sanctuary, so that we were placed where light was shining on us in clear, distinct rays

Ellen White
It has been presented to me that, so far as possible, I am to impart instruction in the language of the Scriptures; for there are those whose spiritual discernment is confused, and when their errors are reproved, they will misinterpret and misapply what I might write, and thus make of none-effect the words of warning that the Lord sends. He desires that the message He sends shall be recognized as the words of eternal truth." —Letter 280; 1906, page 4

Do you mean to say ‘God’ established SDA Doctrines via Ellen White then?

 

[Starrsmother]

What should really raise some eyebrows is if this world lasts long enough that there is a 666th pope!

 

[Pythons]

What should really raise some eyebrows is if this world lasts long enough that there is a 666th pope!

Do you realize that the above was your 777th post Starrsmother?
…Could there be something going on there with that:thumbsup:

 

[Starrsmother]

Do you realize that the above was your 777th post Starrsmother?
…Could there be something going on there with that:thumbsup:

MY HEAD ROTATED ONCE WHEN I READ YOUR POST–SO PROBABLY!

 

[Pythons]

MY HEAD ROTATED ONCE WHEN I READ YOUR POST–SO PROBABLY!

LOL!