What is the Biblical basis for the papacy as AntiChrist?

[With_Questions]

Thought I would ask.

I have read this in Chick tracts and never gotten it either. I was surprised to learn that some Lutherans believe this also.

The answer I was given on another thread was 2 Thessalonians chapter 2.

I have read this chapter several times and don’t get it. I see quite a few non matches between this chapter and the papacy. But maybe that is me being a blockhead. So I thought I would ask.

It seems to me one could just as easily argue that radical Islam is the AntiChrist. Or maybe Mormonism. Why the papacy and only the papacy? Bible please.

And please be civil. Maybe the Bible does clearly point to the papacy and only the papacy as AntiChrist. But if it does, I don’t see it.

 

[iaskquestions]

“Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.” (2 Thes 2:3-4)

This is most often interpreted by many anti-Catholics as a reference to the Pope. Why? I don’t know. I’m particularly concerned about “the temple of God”. What does temple of God refer to?

Another reference is from the book of revelation.

“This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman (whore of Babylon) is seated” (Rev 17:9)

Rome is a city which sits on 7 hills (although not mountains). So people conclude that Rome is the whore of Babylon and therefore the Pope is the antiChrist.

However, if you read Revelation in context, you’ll see why that cannot possibly be a reference to the Pope.

See these links:

catholic.com/thisrock/1994/9409fea4.asp
catholic.com/thisrock/1994/9410fea2.asp

 

[Pinkyyy]

Why can’t it be both? With Questions, not all have this the “Pope=antichrist” view.

It’s interesting that you say it may be a muslim. There is a theory, and it’s very interesting. It believes that there may be a at least semi-merging of Catholicism/Isam - or something to that effect. Or maybe not a physical merging, but a coming closer together and someone in power in the church could very well be one of the beasts - the false prophet (I don’t believe the NT actually uses the word anti-christ?) and the other beast being a muslim leader (the king).

I don’t know if I buy that, but this writer does have an interesting theory about the burning mountain that is described in Revelations - an asteroid. It’s interesting.

Here’s some links:

be-ready.org/pope.html
anunseenworld.com/rapture.html
be-ready.org/overview.html

 

[bpbasilphx]

First, Vatican was NEVER anciently reckoned among the seven hills of Rome. Consequently, the pope cannot be what is referred to in Revelation.

Next, there are several world cities built on seven hills:

1. San Francisco.
2. Nashville (seat of the Southern Baptist Convention)
3. Jerusalem (remember how Israel is frequently referred to by the prophets as a trollop, and Jesus said that Jerusalem was the one who killed the prophets and stoned those sent to her?)
4. Mecca.

Think about it.

 

[Pinkyyy]

I meant to give this link as well.

be-ready.org/fire.html

Who knows what will happen in when the end comes - who will be the antichrist or who will be the best, who will be whatever. But, obviously it will be very disasterous for whoever is around the “mountain of fire” that will basically be the wake up call of what is happening - an asteroid. The middle east has to be left intact, particularly Jerusalem for what is going to happen after that. Therefore, if a huge mountain of fire were to hit earth, the most likely spot it would be is near us (U.S.A.) - so I doubt nashville or California would be the likely spot for the 7 mountains.

Every religion says something different. Catholics say it’s not them, Protestants say its not them. Others say it’s the muslims.

Truth is we won’t know unless we’re in it.

 

[TriuneUnity]

First, Vatican was NEVER anciently reckoned among the seven hills of Rome. Consequently, the pope cannot be what is referred to in Revelation.

Next, there are several world cities built on seven hills:

1. San Francisco.
2. Nashville (seat of the Southern Baptist Convention)
3. Jerusalem (remember how Israel is frequently referred to by the prophets as a trollop, and Jesus said that Jerusalem was the one who killed the prophets and stoned those sent to her?)
4. Mecca.

Think about it.

Haha…50/50 shot it’s Frisco or Nashville.

 

[With_Questions]

“Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.” (2 Thes 2:3-4)

This is most often interpreted by many anti-Catholics as a reference to the Pope. Why? I don’t know. I’m particularly concerned about “the temple of God”. What does temple of God refer to?

I have some questions on this quoted passage also.
(1) Isn’t this a man, not an office?
(2) It is described as the man of lawnessness. Now of all the criticisms of Catholicism I have heard, lawnessness does not rise to the top. My understanding us that us wacko fundamentalist types and Catholics agree about 95% on moral theology.
(3) It says this man opposes and exalts himself against every so called God. Now maybe some of the pomp of the papacy is over the top, but exalts himself against every so called God? Isn’t this a little exaggerated
(4) Takes his seat in the temple of God. Wouldn’t the original audience have thought this to be in Jerusalem? But if this must refer to a present day head of a religion city, why not Constantinople? Or why not Salt Lake City?
(5) Proclaiming himself to be God. When has the pope ever claimed himself to be God?

Another reference is from the book of revelation.

“This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman (whore of Babylon) is seated” (Rev 17:9)

Rome is a city which sits on 7 hills (although not mountains). So people conclude that Rome is the whore of Babylon and therefore the Pope is the antiChrist.

However, if you read Revelation in context, you’ll see why that cannot possibly be a reference to the Pope.

I have heard this logic also. Rome has seven hills, therefore this passage must refer to Rome.

One phrase I use for this is “uniqueness problem”.

I am sure that there are several towns in Maine that also have seven hills. Maybe this passage refers to Millinocket, Dover-Foxcroft, or some place like that.

 

[ralphinal]

One of the cities in Ohio does as well, either Cleveland or Cincinati, I think. It leads me to hold that Jerry Springer is the Anti-Christ.

THe most logical conclusion is that it refers to Jerusalem, with Babylon as Rome. The early Church would have seen the political and religious figures in Jerusalem as selling out to Rome, thus the Whore of Babylon. We know that Rome was called Babylon in the NT. It just seems to fit.

 

[With_Questions]

Truth is we won’t know unless we’re in it.

How true.

Which gets me to thinking of false logic that I have read that is very irritating.

And that would be looking at current conditions, juxtaposing end times passages upon them, and coming out with a theology.

The problem is that if current conditions change, your theology gets exposed as false.

Exhibit A would be the 60s and 70s version of the “Late Great Planet Earth”.

Just about every end-times link and book that I have read is much too speculative for my tastes. When we are in it, then we will understand. But not now.

 

[TriuneUnity]

One of the cities in Ohio does as well, either Cleveland or Cincinati, I think. It leads me to hold that Jerry Springer is the Anti-Christ.

THe most logical conclusion is that it refers to Jerusalem, with Babylon as Rome. The early Church would have seen the political and religious figures in Jerusalem as selling out to Rome, thus the Whore of Babylon. We know that Rome was called Babylon in the NT. It just seems to fit.

It’s a typology, I believe, as is much of apocalyptic literature. John is zeroing in on pagan Rome and apostate Jerusalem and using them as a model for all the enemies of Christ from His ascension to His return. The end times, and the tribulation are that entire period of human history that started with Pentecost. We are in the tribulation right now. Any kingdom of man which arrayed against Christ and His people can properly be called Babylon.

 

[Mannyfit75]

I like to add the assumption that the Pope is the Anti-Christ or his office is the Anti-Christ is completely a text in the Bible that taken out of context.

Most of it is written by those who have a hidden Anti-Catholic agenda. Some even believe that Catholicism will usher in a world wide religion.

Well, that is hardly the truth. Since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church and the Father’s of the Council have open “dialogue” to Non-Believers and Christians who are not in full communion with them.

However, I like to note, the Leaders of the Church have been working on for re-unification with Christianity. Starting with the Eastern Orthodox Church. The unification between Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism will probably happen is our life time or the next generation (I would rejoice when that day comes).

I doubt the Protestants will fully unit with us because their theology itself is completely flawed and it is not founded in Sacred Scripture or Sacred Traditions. Their theology existed during the time of the Reformation.

Only if Protestant to convert to Catholicism, then unity is possible. Protestantism itself have to CEASE to exist because many of its beliefs have views from early heresies as far as the 300s.

So for one, unification with the Protestants is NOT going to happen. Since the Eastern Orthodox Church has Apostolic Succession, Holy Orders, and Seven Sacraments, there is hope
for unity.

Many Protestants, through no fault of their own, have this idea that world religion will be lead by the Catholic Church under the supervision of the Pope. They have provided images of Pope John Paul II praying with Non-Christians, like Buddhists, Hindus, Pagans etc? I have taken photography in high school back in 1990s and photographs can be manipulated. You put a text in a photo, the image itself will be distorted. Yes, the Pope have pictures of th Non-Christians but does not mean he believe what they believe. For all we know, he could be praying for their conversion to Catholicism. Besides, Jesus himself ate with sinners, and even healed a Gentile’s slave. The Apostles even ate with Gentile after Penecost.

The one flaw that really made be laugh is the claim that Vatican is the Great City in Revelation. Well, the Vatican did not exist when John wrote it. Second, in Revelation 11:7-8, it reads, “And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit will make war upon them and conquer them and kill them, and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which is allegorically called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified.”

The Lord was crucified in Jerusalem not the Vatican. I can go on by this flawed form of theology. Second the Beast or 666 is Nero… not the Pope.

 

[With_Questions]

The end times, and the tribulation are that entire period of human history that started with Pentecost. We are in the tribulation right now.

I have never heard this one. When I have heard the word tribulation, I have always heard it in the context of a seven year period in the future which may or may not be preceded by an event called the rapture of the church.

I suppose if you do believe that we are in the tribulation right now that you must come up with some person or institution that is the antiChrist, even if it doesn’t totally match all of the relevant Scripture passages.

Now I disagree, but at least it makes a little more logical sense given this assumption.

 

[TriuneUnity]

I have never heard this one. When I have heard the word tribulation, I have always heard it in the context of a seven year period in the future which may or may not be preceded by an event called the rapture of the church.

Yes…but that is dispensationalist nonsense that has only been around for two hundred years. Rapture, blah.

I suppose if you do believe that we are in the tribulation right now that you must come up with some person or institution that is the antiChrist, even if it doesn’t totally match all of the relevant Scripture passages.

We’ve been in the end times, which consists of the tribulation, since Pentecost. Peter’s sermon says as much. Of course, the tribulation will get worse as time progresses. This is the traditional amillennial position.

Anti-Christs will exist at all points in history. The 2 Thess. reference may refer to the papacy, but the papacy has not always been a manifestation of that prophecy.

 

[JonNC]

Yes…but that is dispensationalist nonsense that has only been around for two hundred years. Rapture, blah.

We’ve been in the end times, which consists of the tribulation, since Pentecost. Peter’s sermon says as much. Of course, the tribulation will get worse as time progresses. This is the traditional amillennial position.

Anti-Christs will exist at all points in history. The 2 Thess. reference may refer to the papacy, but the papacy has not always been a manifestation of that prophecy.

and may not necessarily be in the future.

 

[TriuneUnity]

and may not necessarily be in the future.

That is correct.

 

[JonNC]

=Mannyfit75;4148759] Most of it is written by those who have a hidden Anti-Catholic agenda.

Well, yeah. I’d say Luther did have a somewhat anti-catholic view.

Some even believe that Catholicism will usher in a world wide religion.

No, I think Christ will do that.

Well, that is hardly the truth. Since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church and the Father’s of the Council have open “dialogue” to Non-Believers and Christians who are not in full communion with them.

I doubt the Protestants will fully unit with us because their theology itself is completely flawed and it is not founded in Sacred Scripture or Sacred Traditions.

So, what you’re saying is that the Vatican’s efforts on ecumenism with, say, Lutherans is a waste of time. Thankfully, they don’t think so. And I wouldn’t be so quick to limit the influence of the Holy Spirit. If you look into it, there has already been significant progress in some areas.

So for one, unification with the Protestants is NOT going to happen. Since the Eastern Orthodox Church has Apostolic Succession, Holy Orders, and Seven Sacraments, there is hope
for unity.

See my comments above. I think unity is possible - not easy, and I pray for it daily.

Jon

 

[With_Questions]

Yes…but that is dispensationalist nonsense that has only been around for two hundred years. Rapture, blah.

For the record, I have not bought into that either. However, I am now undecided on end times stuff.

We’ve been in the end times, which consists of the tribulation, since Pentecost. Peter’s sermon says as much. Of course, the tribulation will get worse as time progresses. This is the traditional amillennial position.

I’ll have to think about this for a while since I am an undecided voter here.

Anti-Christs will exist at all points in history. The 2 Thess. reference may refer to the papacy, but the papacy has not always been a manifestation of that prophecy.

If you believe it is the papacy though, you must address the places where this passage really doesn’t seem to line up with the papacy.

 

[TriuneUnity]

For the record, I have not bought into that either. However, I am now undecided on end times stuff.

I’ll have to think about this for a while since I am an undecided voter here.

Good, because if Jesus doesn’t know the hour, neither will we lol. If you want a recommendation, though, I would suggest Kim Riddlebarger’s The Case for Amillennialism. Awesome stuff.

If you believe it is the papacy though, you must address the places where this passage really doesn’t seem to line up with the papacy.

The passages that reference the man of lawlessness may be entirely future tense, in which case, this figure doesn’t always exist within the Church.

We have to remember, too, that while we believe the papacy is the fulfillment of 2 Thess. the confessions are not infallible. They are subject to correction if it be proved they are wrong.

 

[Sublime_Prince]

“This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman (whore of Babylon) is seated” (Rev 17:9)

Rome is a city which sits on 7 hills (although not mountains). So people conclude that Rome is the whore of Babylon and therefore the Pope is the antiChrist.

However, if you read Revelation in context, you’ll see why that cannot possibly be a reference to the Pope.

Well this is one of the reasons my girlfriend doesn’t want me to become a catholic priest, but it really doesn’t matter to me if the catholic church is the anti-christ or not; the pope will forgive me. With all the scandals in the church I could see how it would be easy for some to think that. As I told my girlfriend though the catholic priesthood has such a high demand for priests they are willing to accept any bum who walks in the front door who wants to be a priests and that is more important to me than if the church is the anti-christ or not.

Here are a couple sites that offer a very interesting analysis of the Catholic Church.

A different perspective of the Catholic Church
Russian Orthodox and Catholics Churches
Another interesting topic

Whats interesting is on one of these sites they point out the ‘all seeing eye’ and the ‘perfect triangle’ that some of the catholic churches have in those photos. Many critics critize masonry for these symbols and claim they comes from an ancient egyptian religion, but maybe in reality they were symbols in the catholic church a very long time ago that can only be found in a minority of churches around the globe today.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Well, yeah. I’d say Luther did have a somewhat anti-catholic view.

He did that is why he left.

No, I think Christ will do that.

Christian unification will instill Christians to unity.

So, what you’re saying is that the Vatican’s efforts on ecumenism with, say, Lutherans is a waste of time. Thankfully, they don’t think so. And I wouldn’t be so quick to limit the influence of the Holy Spirit. If you look into it, there has already been significant progress in some areas.

If Lutheran believes the “office of the Papacy” is the Anti-Christ. You wrote it in another thread that you believe the Office of the Papacy to be Anti-Christ. So I don’t think why the Vatican would condone Lutherans who held such heretical view.

See my comments above. I think unity is possible - not easy, and I pray for it daily.Jon

I think unity is possible with Eastern Orthodoxy but not with Protestants. Their doctrines have changed through the years and it does not even fit with Catholic theology. Unless Protestantism itself reverse its view on justification on faith alone and Scripture alone and affirms that Jesus Christ established One Church through Peter, and recognized the Primacy of Peter… Perhaps then… I will believe it.

Like I said Protestantism theology differs from Catholic theology. This itself will not cause unity.