Question for X-SDA or knowledgeable Catholic

[losh14]

Why? Can you give specifics?

CLAIM 8: Antichrist is a church that revives ancient Babylon’s paganism, which is the Catholic Church.
OBJECTION: This is where it becomes so contrived I’m just not going to waste more time going further. For one, where is the description of Babylonian worship? I’ll say it again:

WHERE IS THE DESCRIPTION OF BABYLONIAN WORSHIP?

It’s not presented here. It’s not given in National Sunday Law. It’s proof by assertion - ie, the Catholic Church is the Antichrist, so it must be practicing Babylonian worship, so whatever they do, that’s what Babylon did.

It’s baloney. If you want to cite Newman, include p.372:
“Confiding then in the power of Christianity to resist the infection of evil, and to transmute the very instruments and appendages of demon-worship to an evangelical use, and feeling also that these usages had originally come from primitive revelations and from the instinct of nature, though they had been corrupted … the rulers of the Church from early times were prepared, should the occasion arise, to adopt, or imitate, or sanction the existing rites and customs of the populace, as well as the philosophy of the educated class.”

And your website treats this as though it were an exposé. Newman saw it as adopting and redeeming practices that pagans had corrupted. This leads back to another general objection I hold to the website.

Similarity is necessary, but not sufficent, to determine intent.

Example: I have a fondness for hot chocolate. I drink it even in the summer. In a Latin American lit class I found out that a hot cacao-based drink was offered kings who were believed to be divine. Should this cause a moral crisis within me - that my drinking hot chocolate might offend God because it was a pagan practice?

Neither does our use of wedding rings, candles or special clothes for worship cause a moral crisis. Even if pagan dieities existed (and Scripture asserts they do not), they would not have a monopoly on things like days of the week, foods and festivals, clothing, etc.

And if the Name I pray to is Jesus Christ, can you explain how any other entity would intercept that praise?

By the way, it’s really weak to argue that Sunday worship is meant to worship the sun. Yeah, it’s a pagan relic in English (like all the other days of the week), but go back to Latin and it’s Dominicus - literally “Day of the Savior.”

 

[christian_777]

the problem with the enterpretation in the link 777 posted is it fails to notice the most sublime but obvious clue for idetifying the woman who rides the beast. she is the most ancient matriarch and has never been without a daughter to mother her. the primary identifying mark was entirely missed and it’s the mark Jesus accused the leaders of Jerusalem of having. " all the blood ever shed on earth is on her hands,"

The remark was for the Jews and it concerned the killing of the prophets. The contex does not say that She was never without a daugther. The bible must understood as it speaks or we will always get it wrong.

when abel’s blood was shed it was all the blood ever shed on earth. the earth opened it’s mouth in the beginning too. the woman, the beast, and the religion of anti-christ is much too entrenched ib the darkness of the human mind too be pinned down to a visible institution. much too sublime to manifest on the surface as if you see it solidified.

Not at all. the book is called Revelation and at the beginning a blessing is promised to all who read and understand. She is also identfied in Daniel as coming of of Rome, did she not also take that name? Roman Catholic.

that’s folly. believe the apostle Paul when he teaches it is hidden till the end events.

We are there. Many believe that the bible indicates they started in 1798 .

understand that untill it does it permeates humanity and operates in secret and we are all vulnerable to acting out of it’s false reality religiously.

You seriously think that God would have that for His people? God will always and has always put His people on notice. Amos 3:7. Did He not warn the deciples of the detruction of Jerusalem and of things to come.?

the first born man awakened in the light of the false dawn of anti-christ. In the false light of the primordial maternity of Eve. All the blood ever shed on earth was on her hands.

Where is this in Scripture?
There are more identfying marks than the sheding of the blood of the saints. What you have failed to do is to use the bible in context to proof your point.

 

[knarrrj]

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,​

Certainly the Church is not the anti-Christ church, but the current church in Rome, who many assume to be the Catholic Church, is not the Catholic Church. For a Church to be the Catholic Church its teachings have to be in line with its historical/ traditional teachings. The current church in Rome is not teaching the Catholic Faith as handed down through the centuries and as taught bey Her popes. In this sense I would say the current church headquartered in Rome is anti-Christ .
Ronald Knarrrj@ori.net

Annie

 

[christian_777]

Losh 14

CLAIM 1: In the Bible, a woman symbolizes a church.
OBJECTION: The website cites Is 54 and Ez 16, which accuse Jews of committing the spiritual equivalent of adultery by participating in idol worship. It is not uniquely a church - an institution based on covenantal relationship with God is sufficient. Ie, you can’t rule out first-century Judaism as being represented by the Whore, especially given the Scriptural precedent in Isaiah and Ezekiel which readers of John’s Apocalypse would have understood.
Do not ignore that the church is called Israel. Gal Galatians 3:29
If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. It is also clear that the church is called the bride. Revelation 19:7
Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory! For the wedding of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready.
And there are others that will clearly verify that the church and those who are of God are refer to as a woman or bride Hosea depicts the relationship of a husband and his wife at God’s instructions to reflect the attitude of Israel in her relationship with God. There are too many references to such to deny that a woman is used as a symbol of the church in relation to God. What about the parable of the 10 virgins.

CLAIM 2: The Whore is a corrupt church that teaches false doctrines.
OBJECTION: The Whore is punished for her adultery - and this is consistent with the language in Isaiah and Ezekiel. It is that she broke her marriage vows and is thus playing the harlot - again, the Jews are John’s intended target.

The Jews are not the object of God’s special attention at this time but the church, spiritual Israel. All can agree that she lost that when she rejected Christ and Paul speaks of it in Roams 11

Will continue.

One very important point is that what is writen in Revalations is for us not those in John’s time.

 

[losh14]

777, your stock went up in my mind, thank you for responding.
Take your time, I have a lot to attend to IRL this week and may not be back here for a few days.

In the meantime, I’d also like to ask you to explain conceptually - ie, in ideas for now and we can get to specific verses later - why you take Revelation to be for our time, not John’s? I think this underlies a fundamental difference in how we view Scripture, but I want to know your reasoning.

 

[christian_777]

777, your stock went up in my mind, thank you for responding.
Take your time, I have a lot to attend to IRL this week and may not be back here for a few days.

In the meantime, I’d also like to ask you to explain conceptually - ie, in ideas for now and we can get to specific verses later - why you take Revelation to be for our time, not John’s? I think this underlies a fundamental difference in how we view Scripture, but I want to know your reasoning.

Revelations and Daniel are two books that can be understood together. You will find that some of the same terms are used and you may well know that many scholars accept that they are better understood together.
In Daniel we see that the things shown Daniel will not be understood until the end when knowledge will be increased and men travel extensively ( my words). This is addressing our time and Revelation being of the same must also address our time.
Also consider that if it was for John’s time all the events would be long pass and we certainly do not believe that.

 

[Holly3278]

I’m not an ex-SDA but I am a knowledgeable Catholic. I did attend an SDA church once out of curiosity. It was interesting. And yes, they are very anti-Catholic. The beast of Revelation was most likely the Emperor Nero. Also, the Haydock Commentary is a good Catholic commentary and I’m sure it has commentary on Revelation as well. It is available for E-Sword.

 

[juliamajor]

WW1: 16.5 million How many people died in World War 1?

WW2: 50-70 million How many people died in World War 2?

Inquisition: A number of legitimate sources list the murdered anywhere between 50 million to 200 million. How many people died from the Inquisition?

If you take the Inquisition and compare it with WW2 and WW1 individually, the Inquisition may have killed the most.

That’s quite a trick since the Black plague decimated Europe and kept the population low for centuries. According to historical records europe during the inquistion didn’t have a population near enouh to compensate for that kind of severe loss of population try to get some real history and real statistics instead of those demented ones promoted like those of your ilk.If it wasn’t so pathetic this would be very laughable.Assigning absurdities and believing anything negative, no matter how absurd shows a desperation , a lack of intelligence and integrity that anyone seeking the truth should run away from . But you believe anything and no matter how much evidence is produced (like the sunday/Sabbath nonsense) you still won’t consider it. All that proves is that bigotry and small mindedness abound.

 

[juliamajor]

Bottom line: you’re arguing against a terrible vision of a religious organization gone haywire, and that is a vision that neither history nor present attest to ever existing.

I know you won’t do it, but I’ll ask you to go to a Mass this weekend. Just one. Sit in the back and watch and tell me if it’s what you expected.

Sorry I can not go to Mass, for I have not been persuaded that the following is not true.antichristtruth.com/…

Your SDA if you didn’t believe the totality of rubbish therein you wouldn’t be SDA.If the SDA didn’t have Anti-catholicism as one of it’s tenets itwould have nothing of any real interest to sell. You sell hatred pure and simple.No matter how you sanctify or ennoble it -that’s what it is.Last time I heard -"loving kindness " was one of the main attributes of God. your mere promoting of hatred is not in standing with Christ’s word Of loving one’s neighbors.And there is not a semblance of correction in anything plastered over the revolting web-site.Just pure unadulterated hatred.Just hatred. Why would I believe anybody or any websight so hate filled?I get the same cringing, have to take a shower feeling that I’ve gotten as a looked into skinhead and klan sites.

 

[juliamajor]

The truth hurts! Doesn’t it?
Actually-no it doesn’t-but ignorance does-it hurts everyone .

 

[juliamajor]

You might do a search for the Most Holy Family web page. NO! The Catholic Church is not the beast, but the Vat. II church of darkness probably is as it, and its popes, teach doctrine contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church. For example that salvation can be found in other religions.
Too, It has changed the substance of several of the Holy Sacraments which is against the teachings of the Church.
knarrrj@ori.net

You need to join another church-you can’t pick and choose what you like and dislike.Or are you just another "cafeteria Catholic"in traditionalist guise?

 

[Church_Militant]

Well… he surely protested (like all the first Christians) against the pagan religions and some elements the Jews kept introducing in the Christianity (e.g.: circumcision, cutting away the foreskin of the penis).

All Christians were protestants since they all protested against the pagan religions around them.

That’s funny since we have both scripture and history that shows clearly that the earliest believers were very much Catholic in what they believed.

The Eucharist IS Scriptural

 

[juliamajor]

WW1: 16.5 million How many people died in World War 1?

WW2: 50-70 million How many people died in World War 2?

Inquisition: A number of legitimate sources list the murdered anywhere between 50 million to 200 million. How many people died from the Inquisition?

If you take the Inquisition and compare it with WW2 and WW1 individually, the Inquisition may have killed the most.

Thanks for the link-here’s what it REALLY says-
As for how many deaths may be attributed to the various inquisitorial bodies, I’m not certain who the previous contributor refers to when he states that “those who thoroughly study the inquisition” agree that the death toll was in the millions, but he or she is quite wrong on multiple levels. I am unaware of any modern historian who would accept such ridiculous numbers and it has nothing to do with whether or not they are Christian. Again, for a general treatment of the various inquisitions, read Edward Peters’ Inquistions, and for a more specialized treatment turn to Richard Kieckhefer’s Repression of Heresy in Medieval Germany. Finally, the previous contributor was correct in pointing to the papal bull of 1184, ab abolendam, which Pope Lucius III did indeed issue the year before his death, as the beginning of the papal inquisition, but episcopal inquisitions had existed prior to this, and indeed the first time heretics were burned was at Orleans in 1022. And again, even with the establishment of the papal inquisition, various judge legates, which is what individual inquisitors were, pursued their duties in differing ways and with differing agendas. In sum, there never was anything one cold refer to as THE inquisition, simply various individual inquisitions.
MORE: According to Henry Kamen’s “The Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision” it is very difficult to determine, because if people fled - which they usually did - the Inquisition would burn them in effigy, and make no distinction in their records between whether someone was burned in effigy or in reality. According to Kamen, at the height of the Inquistion, they executed a handful of people per year, and the State of Texas executes more people in a year than the Inquisition did in ten.

 

[Church_Militant]

WW1: 16.5 million

How many people died in World War 1?

WW2: 50-70 million How many people died in World War 2?

**Inquisition: **A number of legitimate sources list the murdered anywhere between 50 million to 200 million. How many people died from the Inquisition?

If you take the Inquisition and compare it with WW2 and WW1 individually, the Inquisition may have killed the most.

This is a complete fabrication because if the propaganda of the SDA was true then based on the facts of history, then the Inquisition would have totally depopulated Europe.

When you can support your remarks with authentic historical facts then you might win a hearing, but the SDA never does that. I read “The Great Controversy” and filled its margins with red ink notes that showed every lie and unscriptural comment, the passed it back to some guys I knew who believed all that stuff.

So long as you continue to accept SDA propaganda and polemics without doing your own fact checking you will continue to be led astray.

 

[juliamajor]

CLAIM 8: Antichrist is a church that revives ancient Babylon’s paganism, which is the Catholic Church.
OBJECTION: This is where it becomes so contrived I’m just not going to waste more time going further. For one, where is the description of Babylonian worship? I’ll say it again:

WHERE IS THE DESCRIPTION OF BABYLONIAN WORSHIP?
As far as the whole Babylonian worship see postings #44-46-By a Protestant minister who first published Hislop’s book then felt compelled to discover the truth-and came to the conclusion in the article.

 

[Church_Militant]

Where is this in Scripture?
There are more identfying marks than the sheding of the blood of the saints. What you have failed to do is to use the bible in context to proof your point.

All this from the denomination/cult whose leaders have several times now predicted the day and time of Christ’s return in direct contravention of the New Testament…and been proved wrong each time.

Furthermore, there is nothing in the Bible that says that everything that we Christians believe and practice has to be found in its pages, and I defy you to provide any such scripture.

I even offered the opportunity twice here on these forums and no one could do it.

• It’s NOT in the Bible, okay?
• It’s NOT in the Bible, okay? (Part II)

 

[knarrrj]

YOUR NOT A CATHOLIC THEN !Being disobedient and renouncing church policy makes you non-catholic-go with your Buddies in the SDA since you agree with them.Become Protestant- you’re 3/4 of the way there!

 Would you please explain to me why following the teachings of the Church makes me a 3/4 Protestant? True Catholics follow Church teaching regardless of whether Her "popes" doo or not. No pope can change the substance (matter and/ or form) of the Holy Sacraments- Church teaching- and to attempt to do so makes them not   Catholic.

Who is Catholic- one who follows what the Church teaches, or one who follows a “pope” who teaches contrary to what the Church teaches???
Knarrrj@ori.net

 

[juliamajor]

Would you please explain to me why following the teachings of the Church makes me a 3/4 Protestant? True Catholics follow Church teaching regardless of whether Her “popes” doo or not. No pope can change the substance (matter and/ or form) of the Holy Sacraments- Church teaching- and to attempt to do so makes them not Catholic.
Who is Catholic- one who follows what the Church teaches, or one who follows a “pope” who teaches contrary to what the Church teaches???
Knarrrj@ori.net

That has to be one of the more bizarre quotes by sedevacantists.One othe unique things about the Catholic church is papal infallibilty.Are you denying that?If you do that takes you out of mainline Catholicism.Do you believe that Jesus lied when He said that the gates of hell wouldn’t prevail?
What sacraments have been changed-?I’m pre vatican II and I’ve seen no change in the sacraments.Pope teaches contrary to the Church?Which Pope is that?Somebody who doesn’tmeet your doctrinal standards(whatever they are)?What you gonna do -pick up your marbles and go somewhere else because a pope doesn’t live up to your standard of fidelity?What about your fidelity? Does it shift with what you like and dislike?

 

[christian_777]

Losh 14
CLAIM 3: The Antichrist is a worldwide church, so it must be the Catholic Church.
OBJECTION: Non-unique. Accrording to adventist.org, the SDA church is active in 125 nations - thus also sitting on many waters. This could easily reference pagan Rome - which was arguably the center of the world at the time - but would not exclude Israel.

Out of all these the Catholic church truly can make such a claim. She supersedes the others.
CLAIM 4: The Antichrist is a wealthy church, so it must be Catholic.
OBJECTION: The GDP of Vatican City - as a nation - is less than that of Rhode Island. Too much is made of the wealth in Church property - honestly, what is the value of the Sistene Chapel, or the Agony of St. Theresa? Most dioceses run at a deficit with the bulk of their spending on social welfare. Hardly the mark of a harlot.

We all know that wealth is measured in property and in this age is more valuable than cash, that devalues more than any other asset.
CLAIM 5: The Antichrist is a church built on seven hills, which is Rome and so is the Catholic Church.
OBJECTION: The seven hills of Rome are: Quirinal, Viminal, Capitoline, Esquiline, Palatine, Coelian, Aventine. Vatican City is named for the only hill on which it is built - the Vatican. It’s not part of the Rome that John understood and the reference, if it were to the Vatican, would be lost on his audience. The seven hills refer to the pagan Roman Empire that was situated there.

Do not forget that the church came out of Rome. Daniel’s prophecy clearly states that: and the church took the name to further verify the fact, “Roman Catholic Church”.

CLAIM 6: The Antichrist is a religious power that dominates civil powers.
OBJECTION: This is not substantiated by Rev 17. The Whore’s fornication is not equivalent to her control of them, and Scripture does not go so far as to assert an equivalence. The Whore’s guilt is her relatons with them, and may very well be her submission to their control. Again, 1st century Israel submitting to Roman rule.

“She commits fornication with them”. What better way to get what you want. Women have gotten there way for years by the same. Thousands have lost their lives by the same, leave families, lost money by the seduction of women. The church is cast in such a role.

CLAIM 7: The Antichrist is a persecuting church.
OBJECTION. Persecuting? Yes. Church? No, Roman Empire. We have evidence of pagan Imperial Rome’s persecution of Christians (ie, the martyrdom of Polycarp). So far, what you have produced is biased sources, one of which (American Textbook of Popery) is reproduced in the link.

How did the church react to what it called heresy? How best to deceive than the look like the real think? Remember wolf in sheep clothing? Many are looking for a wicked person to do the job but thatl would be obvious. Jesus said that even the elect is in danger of being deceived. What is obvious can not deceive and a church is beat to do this job in the context.

 

[christian_777]

Losh 14
CLAIM 8: Antichrist is a church that revives ancient Babylon’s paganism, which is the Catholic Church.
OBJECTION: This is where it becomes so contrived I’m just not going to waste more time going further. For one, where is the description of Babylonian worship? I’ll say it again:

The church has many practices and doctrines that are not biblical. She validates them by saying there are traditions and that traditions are equal with the bible. Where did they originate? I believe the statement to refer to confusion. This is also the meaning of Babylon. I am not going compile a long list, for me one error is enough for others I know more may be required, but look at this. The church and many Christians believe that at death the righteous goes to heaven, they also believe that Jesus would return for His saints. How can that be? We are in heaven! What will he come for? That is confusion! A man you are agreed to meet is in your house and then you are going to get up to go for him. How can we not see these things?