Question for X-SDA or knowledgeable Catholic

[jofo817]

SDA (seventh day adventists) are pretty much labled a “cult” by many.

The devil hates the Catholic Church, and many “cults” like SDA and JW (watchtower tract society) have bashed Catholicism for years, while at the same time made several “failed” prophecies. (Watchtower Tract Society)

brief recap:

1. SDA = Cult
2. J Witnesses = Cult that deny and teach Jesus was not GOD (antichrist doctrine)
3. The Devil HATES the Catholic Church

In other words, do not believe their lies.The devil and his angels have an agenda and it is anti-christian in nature.

 

[LucyC]

The beast is not the Catholic church in Revelation, it is a government system controlled by a president (Rev.13:5 - authority to act for forty-two months). The European Union is in the process of creating a one world order thru the United nations not the chuch. Its about power and control. This gov’t. will be the revised Roman Empire (Rev. 13:3 - one of its heads seemed to be mortally wounded) from the destroyed old roman empire. The multiple heads are other nations (United Nations) under control of this empire. The gov’t. can’t take control w/out forcing christianity to take a back seat (Rev.13:7 - It was also allowed to to wage war against the the holy ones and conquer them.).

Mt. 7:15 - Beware of false prophets,who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves.

Eph. 4:5 One Lord,one faith,one baptism
God bless.

 

[jpunto7]

I have been searching this forum to see if there is something on this topic but could not find one so I thought that I’d ask an ex-Adventist or any knowledgeable Catholic to comment on the SDA doctrine of the beast of Revelation 13:11= The Catholic Church. I don’t have a commentary on the book of Revelation and the one that I would like to get (Scott Hahn’s) is too expensive for our budget just now. Also, does anyone know if there is a Catholic commentary on the book of Revelation on the internet?

Thanks,

Annie

I recall from reading an apologetics answer from CAF apologist Michelle Arnold a few months ago that she used to be a SDA. She would be an excellent person to ask about this topic. I recall in the answer that the question was about suicide, and she said she almost committed suicide because she thought that God would still let her go to heaven if she did so. She would then say that she was still believing the SDA doctrine at that time, and she decided not to, because she didn’t want to make that serious mistake in the event that she would be at risk of going to hell. She said she later left the SDA church and joined the Catholic Church.

Here is a link to her profile, if you want to ask her your question and get a detailed perspective from a former SDA: forums.catholic-questions.org/member.php?u=9

 

[dayofwrath]

Christan brothers Catholics,Orthodox and Protestants please stop these accusations between you.If you want to know who is the WHORE read the book the coin of the temple by Souheil Bayoud,you will find it in the last chapter (the secret sign).The time is near.
dayofwrath

 

[LizS]

In replacing the Sabbath with Sunday worship, the Church is not replacing what God has ordained. Rather the Church is acknowledging what God has done for us. In the Person of Jesus, God humiliated Himself and became man for our sake, dwelt among us, and died and rose again. This is the means through which God offers salvation and eternal life to all people (not just the Jews, though God has not abandoned them cf Rom 11).

Though the NT does not speak of Sunday worship, we do see St Paul challenging the requirement of circumcision. To continue to follow the Old Covenant (including Sabbath observance) would be to ignore what God has done for us. Jesus is “the Way” (& is “Truth and Life”) and no one can come to the Father except through Him (Jn 14:6). He established the Catholic Church (& the Orthodox) and gave her authority, so to deny this or denounce her as the Beast would be to deny or denounce Christ.

 

[UtSuShImI]

I will give evidences that the Catholic Church MIGHT be the Anti-Christ(First Beast).

The Virgin/Queen of Heaven with a Child Idol:

Genesis says that Noah had 3 sons: Ham,Shem and Japheth. Cush was the son of Ham who married Semiramis(Venus, the mother of all evil), the queen of Babylon. Cush begat Nimrod who was just as evil as his mother. When he grew up, he married his mother, Semiramis. Satan used Nimrod and his mother to set up Baal worship. When Shem knew what Nimrod was doing, Shem killed Nimrod for his crimes against God. She cut Nimrod’s body into many pieces and sent it to different cities as a warning to those messing with the occult. Semiramis had a brainstorm. She could brainwash the people into believing Nimrod was a god they should love. Instead of remembering him as a monster. Semiramis was crafty. Satan worship went underground. There was a heavy price to join it. They had to tell their priests everything they did wrong, called the confessional. After telling all, people were scared to death that the priest might expose them. This way, Semiramis controlled them with an iron fist. Semiramis gave the word that Nimrod was now a god, the sun god “Baal”. They bought it! She became “Queen of Heaven”. She was also called Isis in Egypt. Thus, the idol of Woman and Child was born.

The Real First Pope:

Constantine was the son of a Roman Emperor. After his father died, he felt he was rightful heir to the throne. He took his army and marched against Rome. He was a smart politician. He gained the support of Christians and Pagans by:

Pagan: He secretly worshiped Sol, The Sun god.
Christian: At the stone Milvian Bridge at Tiver River on Oct. 28, 312 A.D., His enemy Maxentius stood between Constantine and the throne. Constantine and his men were vastly outnumbered, and then it happened (so says tradition). Constantine and his troops saw the Cross sign in the sky. If God would help him, he would become a Christian. He won! So Constantine “carefully” described the cross and ordered it placed on every soldiers’ shield. But, the image that should have been a cross, became and Ankh which is a symbol for a sun god. He marched into Rome and shook the world by saying: “I am a Christian!”. He sprinkled his troops in baptism, They became instant Christians. They knew nothing of repentance or of Christ and his love. In 325, He set up the Council of Nicaea gained the title of Summus Pontifex (Title of the Pope).

Peter as the first pope. NOT!

And you guys got almost everyone to believe that it was really the apostle Peter who was the first pope?

Mark 1:30: But Simon’s wife’s mother lay sick of a fever, and anon they tell him of her. Strike 1! Peter was married.

Galatians 2:8: For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles. Strike 2! He went to the Jews and Paul went to the Gentiles.

Paul’s Salutation in Romans 1
Paul wrote letters to Christians in Rome and never said anything about Peter being there.
Strike 3! Paul gave Biblical evidence that Peter was not in Rome.

 

[UtSuShImI]

Part 2!

The Catholic Bible:

Introduction:
The real apostles of Jesus(now ascended) made copies of the real Bible. The only apostle John, who was left, had been placed in exile on the island of Patmos. While he was there, he showed the people there which manuscripts are of God’s. John knew after he died that satan would destroy the scriptures. So the true Bible manuscripts were safe in the hands of the true believers. They made exact copies because they know what will God do to those that change his Word. Mighty ROME ruled the world. Their religion was a form of Baal worship that had come from Babylon and Egypt. Nero thought he was divine. Christians were thrown like wild animals in to the arenas, tortured, etc.​

In the city of Antioch, Syria was the place were first were called Christians, true believers were making exact original manuscripts. Antioch sent missionaries to Egypt to teach the people in Alexandria. Alexandria was satan’ s territory. Egypt, the land of Isis (Queen of Heaven) and Horus (Sun god), at that time was the seat of Baal worship. Some of the world’s greatest minds were living in Alexandria. The men who were proud of their wisdom called themselves Gnostics. As far as they were concerned, soulwinning Christians in Antioch were nutcases.

Gnostics formed a school of religion and philosophy. It became the center of Christian learning and culture. But they didn’t believe in a real heaven or hell. They did not believe the Bible was God’s Word. When they got hold of Bible Manuscripts, they started making changes. Origen, their great student, messed up the scriptures. He didn’t believe God was almighty. He chopped this verse out of scriptures:

I John 5:7 : For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Origen was an Arian, today called a Jehovah’s Witness. He believed Jesus was a lesser God. Constantine(who secretly worshiped the sun god)ordered a man named Eusebius to make him 50 Bibles. He had a chance to use the real Antioch ones or the corrupted Alexandrian ones. He was not a real Christian, he believed like Origen did. There was no way he would touch the manuscripts from Antioch. He used the corrupted manuscripts from Egypt to make his Roman Catholic Bibles. RMC slowly grew in power. Out of the 50 Bible came the “Latin Vulgate”. Waldensians, who were true believers,had copies of the real manuscripts and had to hide up in the Alps for protection. Rome would not put up with competition. They had some of them caught and burned to death.

 

[UtSuShImI]

Part 3!

Mary Worship:

Dogma of the Immaculate Conception- Mary was born without original sin.
Dogma of Assumption of Mary into Heaven.- Mary never died.

Against Bible Teaching, Roman Catholic Institution says this about Mary’s sovereignty, Mary is Queen of Heaven and Earth. As the Most perfect queen conceivable, she must reign in full splendor. This she can do only because she is wholly in heaven, Body and Soul.

The Bible forbids worship of the Queen of Heaven in the 7th and 44th chapters of Jeremiah.

Great Changes In RMC:

Pagans were allowed to bring their statues and idols of Semiramis (Queen of Heaven) and Nimrod (Baal,Sun god) into the church. The names were changed to virgin mary, “Queen of Heaven” and little Jesus. Baal Worship, started by Semiramis and Nimrod successfully moved into the Roman Catholic Institution.

The Confessionals were again set up like they had in Babylon. Priests had control over people again. The Word of God was kept from the people.The stronger the popes became,
the deeper the world sank into the dark ages. Millions went to hell. Satan was delighted. I’m sure all of you know the “Holy” Inquisition right? Many innocent people were accused of being heretics, tortured until they admit to something they didn’t commit, they die and their properties gets shared between the pope and some king.

Revelations Prophecy:

All religions unite into a super one world church (whore). One important sign is that leaders of most of protestant groups have already visited the pope. During the 7 years tribulation, the “inquisition” starts again, killing all the tribulation saints(yes we are all saints in Christ). The anti-christ uses the super church to come into power as the world leader. After 3 and 1 half years, he doesn’t need the church anymore, so he destroys her. Alas, Babylon is destroyed.

 

[LizS]

The Bible forbids worship of the Queen of Heaven in the 7th and 44th chapters of Jeremiah.

Small point, but Catholics DO NOT WORSHIP Mary (how many times does that have to be repeated?). God chose her to bear Jesus - God Incarnate, so she was special to God - a special human - worship is for God alone.

All religions unite into a super one world church (whore).

Jesus prays to the Father; “May they all be one, … that they may be one as we are one. With me in them and you in me, may they be so perfected in unity” (cf Jn 17:21-23)

How many Christian denominations are there? … all established by men who thought they knew better, who created division not unity!

 

[Gerhard2]

You can find Revelations in newadvent.org/cathen/01594b.htm

 

[hbookbinder]

I moved in Adventist circles before becoming a Catholic. The most helpful things online, I found, were a couple websites: www.catholicadventist.com and www.sda2rc.com. The first one in particular has some good essays that discuss questions like the one you raised. One of the essays, Chronological Indications in Revelation 13, shows some of the problems in the Adventist interpretation of the Beast.

 

[una_fides]

I will give evidences that the Catholic Church MIGHT be the Anti-Christ(First Beast).

The Virgin/Queen of Heaven with a Child Idol:

Genesis says that Noah had 3 sons: Ham,Shem and Japheth. Cush was the son of Ham who married Semiramis(Venus, the mother of all evil), the queen of Babylon. Cush begat Nimrod who was just as evil as his mother. When he grew up, he married his mother, Semiramis. Satan used Nimrod and his mother to set up Baal worship. When Shem knew what Nimrod was doing, Shem killed Nimrod for his crimes against God. She cut Nimrod’s body into many pieces and sent it to different cities as a warning to those messing with the occult. Semiramis had a brainstorm. She could brainwash the people into believing Nimrod was a god they should love. Instead of remembering him as a monster. Semiramis was crafty. Satan worship went underground. There was a heavy price to join it. They had to tell their priests everything they did wrong, called the confessional. After telling all, people were scared to death that the priest might expose them. This way, Semiramis controlled them with an iron fist. Semiramis gave the word that Nimrod was now a god, the sun god “Baal”. They bought it! She became “Queen of Heaven”. She was also called Isis in Egypt. Thus, the idol of Woman and Child was born.

The Real First Pope:

Constantine was the son of a Roman Emperor. After his father died, he felt he was rightful heir to the throne. He took his army and marched against Rome. He was a smart politician. He gained the support of Christians and Pagans by:

Pagan: He secretly worshiped Sol, The Sun god.
Christian: At the stone Milvian Bridge at Tiver River on Oct. 28, 312 A.D., His enemy Maxentius stood between Constantine and the throne. Constantine and his men were vastly outnumbered, and then it happened (so says tradition). Constantine and his troops saw the Cross sign in the sky. If God would help him, he would become a Christian. He won! So Constantine “carefully” described the cross and ordered it placed on every soldiers’ shield. But, the image that should have been a cross, became and Ankh which is a symbol for a sun god. He marched into Rome and shook the world by saying: “I am a Christian!”. He sprinkled his troops in baptism, They became instant Christians. They knew nothing of repentance or of Christ and his love. In 325, He set up the Council of Nicaea gained the title of Summus Pontifex (Title of the Pope).

Peter as the first pope. NOT!

And you guys got almost everyone to believe that it was really the apostle Peter who was the first pope?

Mark 1:30: But Simon’s wife’s mother lay sick of a fever, and anon they tell him of her. Strike 1! Peter was married.

Galatians 2:8: For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles. Strike 2! He went to the Jews and Paul went to the Gentiles.

Paul’s Salutation in Romans 1
Paul wrote letters to Christians in Rome and never said anything about Peter being there.
Strike 3! Paul gave Biblical evidence that Peter was not in Rome.

Sounds like the lies posted straight out of a Jack Chick track. You should change your religious affiliation on your profile from Catholic to Fundamentalist or “Anti-Catholic.” A perfect book for you to read that handles these and many more of your anti-Catholic false histories is “Catholicism and Fundamentalism” by Karl Keeting. This book is so amazing. If you haven’t read it, you owe it to yourself.

 

[losh14]

I’ve heard an interpretation that the Mark, right hand or head, may be a cell phone…

Do you recall the purpose for the interpretation, ie what further reasoning there was for the cell phone being the Mark? When we’re talking symbolism, good interepretations really need to tie similarity to intent. They also should be understood in light of the original audience. This is especially true for Scripture, which was relevant to 1st century Christians as well as to us - we have to interpret within context of the original audience otherwise we’re allowing Scripture to be mute or non-relevant for two millenia.

I personally favor a preterist view - that the Beast and Whore already occurred in ancient Rome as Nero and the personal cult of emperor worship. The defeat of the Beast and the Whore aren’t the end of the battle against evil, indeed we still await the final defeat of Satan and his angels at Armageddon. Note also the word antichrist does not appear in Revelation but rather in the epistles of John and to the Thessalonians (as ‘man of sin’) which suggests to me that this type of person or force will remain although the Beast and Whore were specific to the time.

Wiki actually has a decent overview of the preterist view of the Beast, tying in bits from contemporary historians Suetonius and Tacitus, whose views I am more apt to take on the subject because they were closer to the original audience of John’s Apocalypse than we are. It’s indeed grating to see (as many have) an attempt to render one’s political or religious opponent’s name in numerology to get 666, especially to take a name in English (which did not exist at the close of Scripture) and render it so.

 

[losh14]

SDA (seventh day adventists) are pretty much labled a “cult” by many.

The devil hates the Catholic Church, and many “cults” like SDA and JW (watchtower tract society) have bashed Catholicism for years, while at the same time made several “failed” prophecies. (Watchtower Tract Society)

To be fair, the SDA and Jehovah’s Witnesses are groups that arose during a time when nativism and anti-Catholic sentiment ran high. This explains why their eschatology is so focused on the Papacy and on the United States. I was hoping the conversation would remain a little more civil, but that is difficult because tensions tend to run high between these groups and we Catholics.

I should note that part of my family abandoned us years ago after joining the Jehovah’s Witnesses. For years we - including the Catholic, Baptist and UCC parts of my family - ate dinner every Sunday at my great aunt’s, but the Jehovah’s Witnesses found it intolerable to dine with us and parted company, I have cousins I’ve not seen in 20 years because of this. I wish it did not have to be this way.

 

[una_fides]

In replacing the Sabbath with Sunday worship, the Church is not replacing what God has ordained. Rather the Church is acknowledging what God has done for us. In the Person of Jesus, God humiliated Himself and became man for our sake, dwelt among us, and died and rose again. This is the means through which God offers salvation and eternal life to all people (not just the Jews, though God has not abandoned them cf Rom 11).

Though the NT does not speak of Sunday worship, we do see St Paul challenging the requirement of circumcision. To continue to follow the Old Covenant (including Sabbath observance) would be to ignore what God has done for us. Jesus is “the Way” (& is “Truth and Life”) and no one can come to the Father except through Him (Jn 14:6). He established the Catholic Church (& the Orthodox) and gave her authority, so to deny this or denounce her as the Beast would be to deny or denounce Christ.

Actually the NT does mention that public Christian gathering took place on Sunday:
Act 20:7 And on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, being to depart on the morrow. And he continued his speech until midnight.

1Co 16:2 On the first day of the week, let every one of you put apart with himself, laying up what it shall well please him: that when I come, the collections be not then to be made.
Granted from the sola Scriptura perspective (which of itself is an absurd and anti-biblical view) neither of these two verses would be absolutely conclusive, as they may have met every day, and these verses may have simply pointed out specific instances that occurred on Sundays. Nevertheless, these verses do seem to indicate that Sunday was the day when these things took place. Sunday was the day to celebrate the resurrection of our Lord, and there is nothing in any historical records that I am aware of that indicate that the apostles or their immediate successors continued to worship on Saturday rather than Sunday.

Here is Haydock’s commentary on those last two verses:

Act 20:7 On the first day of the week.[1] The interpreters generally take notice with St. John Chrysostom, that the Christians, even at this time, must have changed the sabbath into the first day of the week, as all Christians now keep it. Which change (even as to the manner of keeping one of God’s ten commandments) was made by the Church. — To break bread, meaning the blessed sacrament, as it is commonly expounded. (Witham) — St. Paul did here break bread on a Sunday, as it is broken in the sacrament of the body of Christ, and delivered a discourse to the people, both before and after the celebration of the divine mysteries. (St. Augustine, ep. lxxxvi. ad Casulanum.; Ven. Bede, in xx. Act.)

1Co 16:2 On the [1] first day of the week, which is Sunday, and our sabbath, not the Jewish sabbath, as St. John Chrysostom observes, so that before this time, the apostles had appointed the first day of the week for the worship of God. (Witham)

 

[OchsFam]

I will give evidences that the Catholic Church MIGHT be the Anti-Christ(First Beast).

The Virgin/Queen of Heaven with a Child Idol:

The bold faced text of confession to Satan is just laughable on the surface. IF Satan was taking a confession, it would not be for what was wrong. This is obviously false on the face of it. In regards to the Isis and Mary connection, you really should read some history. Mary was a real person, Isis was not. Mary bore Jesus in her womb, Isis did not. Catholics do not worship Mary, so clearly everything you posted on this topic does not link to the Catholic Church. It may link to some trivial sect that died out thousands of years ago, but not the Catholic Church.

The Real First Pope:

Irenaeus wrote about the Papacy in the mid second century, so that blows this conspiracy theory out of the water. The Catholic Church does not recognize Constantine as a Pope, so again, the Church you are claiming is the first beast is not the Catholic Church. Whichever church recognized Constantine as a pope may have been the first beast, but this is not the Catholic Church.

Also, to discuss your Biblical verses, having been married does not prevent you from becoming a priest, bishop, or even the Pope. That is right, your verse about Peter’s mother-in-law says nothing of him currently being married, but having been married. Even if he were currently married, it would not prevent him from being a Pope. The celibacy of todays priesthood is a discipline, not a doctrine.

Paul was sent to the Gentiles, probably by the command of Peter. What about Acts 15:7? Does this verse get ignored so that you can continue to believe what you want to believe? Clearly Paul was the apostle for the Gentiles and Peter for the Jews, but Paul was likely commissioned by Peter to do this.

As far as Peter’s location, you quote a verse that does not mean anything like what you want it to mean. He also did not mention the Roman emperor, does that mean there was no emperor in Rome? So the fact Paul did not mention Peter can mean two things, one, you are correct that Peter was not in Rome at the time, or two, that he just didn’t mention him since there were a lot of people in Rome he did not mention. There were a lot of Christians in Rome that were not on the list, that does not mean they were not there.

To continue, the Catholic Bible could not have been collected by the Apostle John since there was no collection of books prior to Jerome. There were some smatterings of collections that contained what would today be considered apocrypha by all Christians and some that did not contain what all Christians recognize as inspired. So even if you can see a collection of writings before 400, the definitive Bible was not set until around 400 AD. The protestant Bible is basing their OT off of the Jewish canon which was not established until about 100 AD, so after Christ. This means their canon was uninspired as they were not being guided by God. The Christians were being guided by the Holy Spirit to all truth, which included the canon of the Bible and sorry, only the Catholics were around near 400 and this canon matches exactly what Catholics call the Bible today, not the protestant mutilation of it.

Your third post is just a repeat of what you posted first so there is no need to respond to the Mary worship, which is not the Catholic Church, or the idol worship, which is not the Catholic Church. Also, your Revelation prophesy is your fallible interpretation of scripture which is not lead by the Holy Spirit, but is simply opinion. There is no reason to follow what you believe, especially considering you have not done any legitimate research into the history of the Church built by Christ. Your ability to understand scripture has been warped by lies and anti-Catholic sources. When you read the Church fathers, you will start to see what the early Christians actually believed and none of what you posted matches what the first martyrs of the faith believed. You do not have to listen to me, you need to listen to the Holy Spirit and the history associated with God’s Church. I pray you can overcome your fear of the Catholic Church and start doing your own research instead of following the protestant propaganda spewed out in today’s society. You will find eternal life and nothing is more valuable than this.

God Bless.

 

[losh14]

I will give evidences that the Catholic Church MIGHT be the Anti-Christ(First Beast).

Nice of you to show up. Wondering how long it would take for someone to grab the baton and turn it polemic.

Genesis says that Noah had 3 sons: Ham,Shem and Japheth. Cush was the son of Ham who married Semiramis(Venus, the mother of all evil), the queen of Babylon.

Semiramis isn’t mentioned by name anywhere in the Bible. Cush’s wife’s name is not mentioned. Cush is the father of Nimrod the hunter and warrior, but that’s where the Scriptural story ends. To go farther is to venture outside Scripture into pagan legend.

Which begs the question, what is your source? Here, we believe the Bible. We don’t pay attention to pagan legends of Nimrod and Semiramis.

The Real First Pope:

Was Peter and has been considered to be Peter since at least the early 2nd century, as attested to in writings by Clement, Ignatius and Irenaeus.

So Constantine “carefully” described the cross and ordered it placed on every oldiers’ shield. But, the image that should have been a cross, became and Ankh which is a symbol for a sun god.

The ankh is an Egyptian symbol and predates Constantine by millenia. Contemporary historians relate that Constantine’s seal is cross, not an ankh. What is your source to contrary?

He marched into Rome and shook the world by saying: “I am a Christian!”. He sprinkled his troops in baptism, They became instant Christians. They knew nothing of repentance or of Christ and his love.

This isn’t even verifiable. Do you know the disposition of any of his troops? Do you know if any of them were actually Christians or had been baptized?

In 325, He set up the Council of Nicaea gained the title of Summus Pontifex (Title of the Pope).

You didn’t even bother to look up the title of the Pope, did you? It’s Pontifex Maximus. “Summus” isn’t Latin.

And you guys got almost everyone to believe that it was really the apostle Peter who was the first pope?

Apparantly we didn’t fool you. You did that yourself.

Mark 1:30: But Simon’s wife’s mother lay sick of a fever, and anon they tell him of her. Strike 1! Peter was married.

Peter was married. Clerical celibacy wasn’t mandated in the Latin Rite until the 4th century.

Galatians 2:8: For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles. Strike 2! He went to the Jews and Paul went to the Gentiles.

Popes are allowed to make mistakes. Between the Resurrection and Acts 13, Peter was the undisputed leader of the early church.

Paul’s Salutation in Romans 1

Paul wrote letters to Christians in Rome and never said anything about Peter being there. Strike 3! Paul gave Biblical evidence that Peter was not in Rome.

Paul wasn’t in Rome at the time either, but he died there. Contemporary sources (including Clement of Rome) describe both Peter and Paul as being martyred by Nero during the ‘dies imperii’ in 64 a.d. Historians date Paul’s letter to the Romans in the mid 50’s, likely 55 to 58 a.d.

 

[losh14]

Part 2!

You know, I was going to take the time to go point by point, but I’m not going to bother.
Your understanding of history is incomplete yet you pretend to know what you’re talking about.

The ‘three witnesses’ in 1 John was missing from texts prior to Origen and after, even among authors who argued in favor of Trinitarian doctrine. It first appears in Liber Apologeticus, ascribed to Priscillian of Avila who died around 385. Priscillian mentions that the wording appears as a footnote.

What we (you and me both) cannot conclude is:

1. Whether Origen ‘removed’ the passage from 1 John. None of his copies of the Septuagint survive.
2. Whether the alleged Antiochan bibles and Alexandrian bibles differed, as neither of these survived.
3. Constantine’s intent or disposition before the Lord, since that is for God to judge.

What we can know:

1. Constantine’s cross did not resemble the ankh, which predates Constantine by millenia.
2. Constantine (as recorded by Eusebius) all but forced pagans to practice Christianity, including compelling his troops to pray daily to the Lord Jesus Christ, regardless of their personal beliefs.
3. Constantine himself supported Arian doctrine but took legal and military action against Arius and his followers. In other words, he kept his personal opinions out of the Trinitarian discussion.
4. Even if Arian doctrine crept into the church via some Alexandrian Bible, it did not take root. The Trinity was consistently and persistently upheld from the Council of Nicaea forward.

 

[losh14]

Against Bible Teaching, Roman Catholic Institution says this about Mary’s sovereignty, Mary is Queen of Heaven and Earth. As the Most perfect queen conceivable, she must reign in full splendor. This she can do only because she is wholly in heaven, Body and Soul.

The Catechism does not contain the title ‘Queen of Heaven’ or ‘Queen of Heaven and Earth’, nor does it call Mary perfect. This title is passed through the private devotion of the Rosary, something to which Catholics are not required to devote themselves.

Where Mary is called ‘Queen of Heaven’ is medieval terminology that considered the mother of a reigning king as a queen. Today we call the term ‘Queen Mother’. There is a distinction between a Queen who is royal by birth and a Queen who is royal by motherhood. Where Mary is called Queen it is because of her motherhood, and thereby any honor she bears is because of Jesus and the role God bestowed upon her, not by any work of her own. Scripture records her as saying “All nations shall call me blessed” and it is common to hear Catholics echo this by referring to Mary as “The Blessed Mother.”

The Bible forbids worship of the Queen of Heaven in the 7th and 44th chapters of Jeremiah.

Logical error: Confusion of intention with similitude. The Queen of Heaven in Jeremiah is Asherah, a fertility goddess whose cult of worship included practices that do not resemble modern Marian veneration. Catholicism does not consider Mary to be divine - even if she is considered to have a special place among the souls in Heaven she remains a human being.

Pagans were allowed to bring their statues and idols of Semiramis (Queen of Heaven) and Nimrod (Baal,Sun god) into the church. The names were changed to virgin mary, “Queen of Heaven” and little Jesus. Baal Worship, started by Semiramis and Nimrod successfully moved into the Roman Catholic Institution.

The major problem with this argument is that it is Biblical fact that Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary. If Jesus is really Nimrod and Mary is really Semiramis, then Scripture itself is a pagan work and no Christian institution based on the Bible can justify itself. The argument you present is in fact an argument often used by atheists to accuse Christianity in general of being pagan in origin.

The minor problem is that Marian imagery does not resemble any surviving statues of Semiramis or Nimrod. Marian imagery centers on the woman crowned with stars in Revelation, or on a well-clothed madonna with child. Semiramis is usually depicted as naked and nursing Nimrod.

There is also a confusion of intent and similarity. If the intent is to move worship of Semiramis and Nimrod into the Catholic Church, then either form or substance should alter to resemble the pagan worship. It does not. Why, if we are pagan, do we retain the Christian scriptures? Why, if we are pagan, do we offer praise and glory during the Mass only to the Lord, the Triune God. Marian veneration is actually forbidden during the Mass because the Mass is dedicated to worship of the Father through the Son and Spirit.

The Confessionals were again set up like they had in Babylon.

Error: Proof by assumption. This is the first argument of confessionals in Babylon, and no evidence has been offered.

Priests had control over people again.

Untrue. Confession is anonymous unless the penitent asks for a face-to-face confession.

The Word of God was kept from the people.

Why is it so-often quoted, argued, and taught from through the centuries, then? How do we explain the myriad letters and writings that disseminated from the 1st century through today?

The stronger the popes became, the deeper the world sank into the dark ages.

This is neither quantifiable nor qualified. It has the logical equivalent of “The more puppies there are, the more gasoline will cost.” It is also incorrect. The height of Papal authority was around the 12th century, which was a time of learning and relative peace.

Millions went to hell.

1. You can’t prove that.
2. If millions went to Hell because the Word was hidden from them, what does that say about your understanding of God? That He is capricious, and will hold us to the same standard even if we are ignorant of Him? That Satan can defeat God merely by concealing the Gospel?

I’m sure all of you know the “Holy” Inquisition right?

And we skip another 1,000 years.

Many innocent people were accused of being heretics, tortured until they admit to something they didn’t commit, they die and their properties gets shared between the pope and some king.

Give me the name of a college near you. I’m going to pay for you to take a college class in history.

 

[losh14]

I will give evidences that the Catholic Church MIGHT be the Anti-Christ(First Beast).

After all that, would you be kind enough to offer an answer to the first question of the topic, namely to explain the connection between the Catholic Church and Rev 13:11. I think the answer requested was a Scriptural one.