Maybe you don’t know what the 9 signs are? Why don’t you want to talk about it?
I’ll be glad to talk about it.
#1-Arose from the ruins of the Roman Empire
#2-Received its ruling power and authority from the dragon (Satan, pagan Rome)
#3-World wide power
#4-Rule of 42 prophetic months (1260 yrs.)
#5-The deadly wound that healed
#6-Speaks blasphemy (mortals being able to forgive sins)
#7-His name is (or adds up to ) 666
#8-will be worshiped
#9-make war with the saints
That is how I’ve read it. I don’t agree with it one bit, but I’m not ignorant of it.
The Roman Catholic Church has traditionally suppressed, opposed, and forbidden the open use of the Bible. It was first officially forbidden to the people and placed on the index of Forbidden Books List by the Council of Valencia in 1229 A.D.
Well, seeing what trouble unguided reading of the Bible has caused, I can see their point. But, you misunderstand the “why” part of it. We want people to know the Scriptures, medieval Catholics lived and breathed Scripture because they were taught by men and women who devoted much of their time to reading Scripture, and painstakingly handwritting it. The stain glass windows of our Cathedrals and other art works are full of Biblical stories.
However, when someone comes along and thinks they know better than the Church, better than the Fathers, and that their private interpretation “proves” the Church wrong it is a problem. “How can I understand unless someone explains it to me?” as the Ethiopian eunuch said.
The Council of Trent (1545-63 A.D.) also prohibited its use and pronounced a curse upon anyone who would dare oppose this decree.
From the Fourth Session of the Council of Trent, Decree Concerning the Canonical Scriptures-
history.hanover.edu/texts/trent.htm
I don’t see one part of the Decrees and Canons of the Council of Trent that “prohibited its (Bible) use and pronounced a curse”.
Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, It decrees, that no one, relying on his own skill, shall,–in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, --wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,–whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures,–hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers; even though such interpretations were never (intended) to be at any time published. Contraveners shall be made known by their Ordinaries, and be punished with the penalties by law established.
Many popes have issued decrees forbidding Bible reading in the common language of the people, condemning Bible societies and banning its possession and translation under penalty of mortal sin and death.
I suggest you read “Where We Got the Bible” by Henry Graham.
The Roman Catholic Church has openly burned Bibles and those who translated it or promoted its study, reading, and use (John Hus, 1415 A.D.; William Tyndale, 1536 A.D.)
Yes we did-heretical bibles. We freely burned heretical bibles because they spread error to the Faithful. However, we also got an English translation (the Douay-Rheims version) out before the KJV of 1611.
users.binary.net/polycarp/burning.html
First of all, if you knew anything about revelation, it predicts that an image of the 4th beast would be set up. NOT THE FOURTH BEAST ITSELF. So , the pope as president, even though you meant it in gest shows how really far off you are
I realize that, I was actually making a parody with the accusations against Al Smith (a Catholic) campaigning for pres. back in the day. I do apologize if you took offense at my sarcasm, so I’ll stick to the conversation at hand.
