# Pope John Paul II is in Hell



## C. Matthew McMahon (Apr 3, 2005)

With all the nonsense the media is portraying, I had to write "something." A short blurb:

The Pope is in Hell
by Dr. C. Matthew McMahon

[Edited on 4-4-2005 by webmaster]


----------



## SmokingFlax (Apr 3, 2005)

Heavy!


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Apr 3, 2005)

Wow! Very well put, Matt! 

It's interesting to note that even a Pope may have a place reserved for him in hell, according to Dante's _Inferno_.


----------



## lwadkins (Apr 3, 2005)

Nice to see someone has the courage to say it


----------



## cupotea (Apr 3, 2005)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> With all the nonsense the media is portraying, I had to write "something."
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ChristianasJourney (Apr 3, 2005)

Perhaps so, but personally, I wouldn't have the courage to say so, and not because I'm afraid of what others may think of me, but rather I'm afraid of what God will say of me. Because the truth is, only God knows the soul, and only God knows the heart of an individual. Whatever John Paul represented publically, only God knew his heart. And God is clearly not a denominational God. 

I guess a lot depends on what one must believe in order to be saved. I was taught that it primarly consisted of the sum of the Nicine Creed:

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.


This I'm quite sure John Paul II would have ascribed to. Beyond that, the errors in his (and our life) are sins, but do we know that his sins are so much greater than our sins that they kept him out of heaven? 




[Edited on 4-3-2005 by ChristianasJourney]


----------



## blhowes (Apr 3, 2005)

Catchy title and nice article.


----------



## Solo Christo (Apr 3, 2005)

Hi Janice,

Just out of curiousity, did you read the article Matt posted?


----------



## pastorway (Apr 3, 2005)

He went much further than the Nicene Creed. He believed Mary had to suffer with Christ to gain merit that he could then earn by obedience and good works.

He did not (as far as we know before he died) have faith in Christ alone for salvation. He was trusting, by his own words, in the work of Christ combined with and supplimented by the works of Mary, the Apostles, the saints, the Popes, and even works he himself did to gain merit before Christ.

This is not the gospel. And a fasle gospel cannot save.

*Ephesians 2*
8For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9not of works, lest anyone should boast. 

*1 Timothy 2*
5For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus...

Yes, unless he repented and trusted Christ *alone*, he is in hell, as we ALL DESERVE TO BE but for the grace of God.

Phillip


----------



## lwadkins (Apr 3, 2005)

I think it is the Word of God that judges people and Popes. I think we can be pretty sure that the Pope subscribed to the beliefs of the Roman Church.


----------



## Tirian (Apr 3, 2005)

Good article. I think your call to pray for those in the Apostate church is spot on - we must plead with God that He would turn them from their wickedness and that He would call them out of their folly and into His family.


----------



## Bladestunner316 (Apr 3, 2005)




----------



## ChristianasJourney (Apr 3, 2005)

Yes, I did read it.

And you're right, he probably isn't saved, near as we can tell.

I really shouldn't have responded.

I'm just troubled by how quick we are to send people to hell, when only God knows the true state of a soul, when God knows who he has choosen to redeem, and when salvation can occur up to the point of death. This "can they be saved" thought pattern is prevalent in other threads that talk about dispensationalists, pentecostals, Arminians, non-denoms, home churches, etc.

I don't know the pope, but I know that he was born with all the weaknesses of mankind--greed, envy, hypocrisy. What it looks like to us, is not always the way it is--Think of David comitting adultry, Naaman bowing before the idol, Jacob allowing his father-in-laws gods in his midst. Would a man who was pope and Christian, step down from Popery? Would a man acknowledge his changing views in a world of politics and religion? A world where his predecessor may have been murdered? Only God knows the heart. He will be judged for his lack of belief in God. If he is saved he will be judged for his failure to uphold the truth, and for leading people astray...but again, only God knows where his soul is.

Don't let me trouble anyone though, it's my nature to second guess, it's my nature to argue the other side. I should've been an attorney.

[Edited on 4-4-2005 by ChristianasJourney]


----------



## Robin (Apr 3, 2005)

Matt, ya got guts there, my boy!! Now, if only you could format a "printer friendly" version of the article. Can you? I'd love to disseminate some copies....

Robin


----------



## lwadkins (Apr 3, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ChristianasJourney
> 
> it's my nature to second guess, it's my nature to argue the other side. I should've been an attorney._


_

I object Janice 

[Edited on 4-4-2005 by lwadkins]_


----------



## Solo Christo (Apr 3, 2005)

Janice,

I didn't mean to drag you out. I just wondered if you read the post. It would be different if Matt had posted a bunch of slanderous opinions. He did not. He relied on the Word of God to make a strong point that the rest of the world seems to have missed entirely.

I understand your feelings on condemning others. In this regard though I believe we have enough Scriptural warrant to long in all humility for the Lord to "kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming" (2 Thess. 2:8, ESV). We also share a heavy duty to pray for those lost in the apostate church and Matt did a wonderful job emphasizing that point.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Apr 3, 2005)

Matt, that was a little too irenic don't ya think???


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Apr 3, 2005)

I'm standing right next to Matthew.

Only thing, I posted my take on it on a non-Christian message board. 

Time to Hate Kerry again...


----------



## kceaster (Apr 3, 2005)

The real question I have is did he supress the truth in unrighteousness and did he depend upon Christ alone for his salvation. I have to believe that it is yes to the first, and no to the second.

But I should say that I agree with Westminster when it condemns the See of Rome as the antichrist. As such, any man who considers himself as the Vicar of Christ, no matter what his faith level or understanding, has profaned Christ and blasphemed His Holy Spirit.

Therefore, even though he may escape the punishment of man, yet the Lord our God will not suffer him to escape His righteous judgment. (If you'll pardon my using the WSC in a slightly different way.)

In Christ,

KC


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Apr 3, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Robin_
> Matt, ya got guts there, my boy!! Now, if only you could format a "printer friendly" version of the article. Can you? I'd love to disseminate some copies....
> 
> Robin



Try this link:

The Pope is in Hell


----------



## pastorway (Apr 3, 2005)

> _posted by Janice_
> I'm just troubled by how quick we are to send people to hell, when only God knows the true state of a soul, when God knows who he has choosen to redeem, and when salvation can occur up to the point of death. This "can they be saved" thought pattern is prevalent in other threads that talk about dispensationalists, pentecostals, Arminians, non-denoms, home churches, etc.



Amen!

We as a group (reformed) are quick to judge and often harsh. We may be right and we may be telling the truth, but as I told our church this morning, "Don't try to witness to your Catholic friends this week by telling them the Pope is in hell." We must take this news and bring it to a personal level - that all of us will die and that there is only One Way to be prepared to face death and judgment. We can use the Pope as an example - all are sinners, the wages of sin is still death, and faith alone in Christ is still the Only Way to be saved. 

If they ask outright if we believe he is in hell we have been handed the perfect opportunity to explain the gospel of grace and how God saves sinners. If they press, be honest, but not mean or harsh or judgmental. We must base what we believe on the Bible and take the time to give people the Word of God.

I think Matt's article is right on. But I also think we need to be careful that we all don't jump on the "Pope is burning in hell" bandwagon to the point that we offend people not with the gospel but with our own pontifications about who is and is not deemed by us _worthy_ of salvation!!

This is a critical issue and offers tremendous opportunity to advance the gospel. It also affords us a fantastic opportunity to act like religious bigots and hate filled morons.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Apr 4, 2005)

CNN is conducting a poll on whether the Pope should be "made a saint." At present, 38,793 votes for aye (61%) and 25,212 votes for nay (39%).


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Apr 4, 2005)

FYI - Matthew, if you see extra traffic coming to your article on the reformation, I've been posting links to it all over the place, especially for some of my protestant friends who have just heard about the Pope having 'Mary I'm Totally Yours' on his sleeve. 

Anybody know where I can find (online) Calvin's book on Trent (I think it's called The Acts of the Council of Trent and the Antidote) ?


----------



## RamistThomist (Apr 4, 2005)

This is slightly off the subject but Greg Bahnsen mentioned in a sermon dealing with recent converts to the Roman Church concerning JPII. 

"I grant that the Pope's a nice guy. I wouldn't mind going to a ballgame with him. But when he puts on that mitre and sacrifices Christ anew in the Mass, he is my sworn enemy, now and forever unless God grants him repentance."

You can find that sermon from Covenant Media titled, "The Road to Rome: Was the Reformation Necessary?"


----------



## Arch2k (Apr 4, 2005)

Matt,

Thanks alot for this article. I am so happy to see that you are taking this unpopular (but TRUE!) stance. 

Yesterday, one of our elders prayed for the pope, and praised him for his work of dividing barriers between Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism.  

This caused quite the controversy in our small PCA congregation. But it has also forced me to take my voice to the session, for this drift into friendship with Catholicism is in my opinion a "hill to die on." It is the issue of the gospel itself!!

Thanks again.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Apr 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by OS_X_
> Anybody know where I can find (online) Calvin's book on Trent (I think it's called The Acts of the Council of Trent and the Antidote) ?



Here ya go, Kerry!


----------



## ABondSlaveofChristJesus (Apr 4, 2005)

I want ot link this on my xanga, but I have soooo many catholic friends.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Apr 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by OS_X_
> ...



Puritan Publications is working on that right now. We are going to put together both the Antodote with his treatise on relics too. Its good stuff.


----------



## Robin (Apr 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Robin_
> ...



Thank you, Matt! May I have permission to share this with others?

In an effort to cause even more "trouble",

R.


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Apr 4, 2005)

R. Scott Clark has some great stuff on his site.


----------



## Robin (Apr 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by pastorway_
> 
> 
> > _posted by Janice_
> ...



 This is SUCH an important point!!!

God help us to not be the offense----the Truth is offensive enough!

R.


----------



## blhowes (Apr 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Robin_
> God help us to not be the offense----the Truth is offensive enough!


This is so true, and it doesn't take much truth at that to be offensive. My mother-in-law (a catholic) got mad at my wife recently when she didn't share my mother-in-law's sorrow and concern over the pope's ailing condition. She told her she felt bad for him like she would for any other man, but nothing beyond that. She wasn't trying to be offensive, just telling the truth.


----------



## lwadkins (Apr 4, 2005)

I think that there is a huge difference in how those discussing the subject on this board would approach it if they were speaking in a different context to an audience that was not like minded. I know that I would. I have no desire to hurt anyone and would not run up to my catholic friends and be offensive. I think we have to give that benefit of the doubt to those who are posting here, and yet the reminders of caution in how we approach the subject are valid and welcome.


----------



## Poimen (Apr 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by pastorway_
> 
> 
> > _posted by Janice_
> ...



Excellent. Well said.


----------



## blhowes (Apr 4, 2005)

In light of Pastor Way's post, I was wondering if it might not be a good idea to either modify the names of the threads, or move the threads about the pope into a 'members only' area. I think we want people visiting to react to the doctrine that's presented on the puritanboard, rather than negative comments about someone they hold dear.

Just a thought,
Bob

[Edited on 4-4-2005 by blhowes]


----------



## Shane (Apr 4, 2005)

I think thats a good point.


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Apr 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel_
> Matt,
> 
> Thanks alot for this article. I am so happy to see that you are taking this unpopular (but TRUE!) stance.
> ...



Jeff are you serious ????!?!?!?!?!?

WOW.

Keep us abreast of what goes on.


----------



## matthew11v25 (Apr 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by OS_X_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel_
> ...



I am a CMA member, and the same was said in my church...but no controversy.


----------



## Arch2k (Apr 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by OS_X_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Jeff_Bartel_
> ...



Kerry,

I am sorry to say that it is true. I was SO ANGRY in church after hearing this prayer!  We do have some good elders, and a great pastor...but some of the elders are not fit to raise children, much less be in a position of leadership.

I am in the process of writing a small declaration to have signed by as many as possible taking a CLEAR stance on Roman Catholicism and it's heretical gospel.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Apr 4, 2005)

Stand for the truth, in love.

Matthew 10:16, "be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves."


----------



## Arch2k (Apr 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> Stand for the truth, in love.
> 
> Matthew 10:16, "be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves."



Thanks Matthew. I would love to have some of you critique this when I am finished.


----------



## LawrenceU (Apr 4, 2005)

I thought y'all might be interested in some responses to Matt's article that came across an email list I'm on:
Here is the first:


> All I can say is WOW. Heavy reading...
> 
> For those of you unfamiliar, go visit C. Matthew McMahon's page -
> APuritansMind.com .



Here is the second 



> Kerry and others,
> 
> "Pope John Paul II is in hell. He is burning there will all those who have denied the faith and taught a false Gospel. He is there with all those who attempted to raise their own heads above Christ."
> 
> ...



[Edited on 4-4-2005 by LawrenceU]


----------



## LawrenceU (Apr 4, 2005)

Hah!

I just realised that Kerry on the list is Kerry Gillard here!! Small cyber-world.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Apr 4, 2005)

I appreciate your posting those LU.

"Think the best". I'm in that bunch. I do like to think the best. I do like to be optimistic. Messianic eschatology presses us as Christians to have a future hope. I like thinking the best.

I don't like to think biblically incorrect. Sometimes I do - or, probably, most of the time I do. I don't have things down perfect - not by a long shot. But the basics of Christianity are very important. If someone, self avowed to stand in opposition to Christ is not openly and publicly repentant, just LIKE the thief on the cross, we ought to think truthfully about what the Scriptures say. 

There is only ONE death bed conversion in the bible. Just one. And it contained a public profession of the highest order, as well as the open rebuke of others reviling Christ. There was no mistaking his conversion. Jesus openly acknowledged it as a result.

We cannot say the same of the Pope. He stood for things that are of the vilest theological nature that a human being could demise, or even a serpent. We should remember that Paul (The Holy Spirit) gives us strict instructions on what to think about such men:

2 Timothy 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

Have we turned away? Or are we overly optimistic to a fault? :book:


----------



## LawrenceU (Apr 4, 2005)

BTW, I'm in the same camp as Matt. Just for the record.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Apr 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Robin_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by webmaster_
> ...



Sure. I'm always in some form of trouble, so what the hey.


----------



## ABondSlaveofChristJesus (Apr 4, 2005)

My conservative evangelical college has our flags at half mast for him. Should I post something at how this offends me on our school forum?


----------



## Solo Christo (Apr 4, 2005)

No. But if you must, post something about how it offends God.


----------



## ABondSlaveofChristJesus (Apr 4, 2005)

if I must? Think it wiser to just keep out of the controversy?


----------



## turmeric (Apr 5, 2005)

Okay, youse guys! This dude was a major heretic I'm sure, but there might have been some COMMON grace in some of his actions. Anyway, he was hugely popular and all you're going to get is misunderstanding if you insist on proclaiming to Catholics that he's in hell (which we really don't know for a fact.) 

I'm not into getting into a screaming match with some Catholic about this - he wasn't MY pope, I don't have one, and there have to be better hills to die on. BTW, this isn't a response to Matt's article, it's a response to people who fell they have to correct every evanjellyfish every time it does something. Let's choose our battles, people!


----------



## lwadkins (Apr 5, 2005)

Its so easy just to go along to get along. Just look at all that is being said all around the world and by protestant and reformed churches. Thats what all the world is doing going along to get along. I may be wrong but I believe in speaking the truth in love, even if the truth is offensive. Maybe I'm just feeling a bit peckish but I get very weary of the attitude of standing around quietly as to not offend anyone with the truth. Meanwhile on every radio station, tv channel, street corner, water cooler, the lies are being propagated. I hear even programs that have nothing to do with Christianity proclaiming the Pope as a great christian example and leader. From everywhere all around the lies are flowing, but I need to be quiet so I don't offend. Sorry can't do it.


----------



## Solo Christo (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ABondSlaveofChristJesus_
> if I must? Think it wiser to just keep out of the controversy?


Well, whether or not it is wise to post depends on what you will post. If you plan on posting about how the school has offended you, then I personally do not think you should enter the controversy. If you plan on posting how your school has offended God, then do so, but make your rebuke respectfully based upon Scripture.


----------



## pastorway (Apr 5, 2005)

Just some random thoughts:

God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked.....why should we?

What harm is there in flying flags at half mast in honor a man's life when he has died? He was a man, a sinner, just like we all are. So if we cannot fly the flags at half mast for him, then for whom?

There is a difference between speaking the truth, and speaking the truth in love. The truth is offensive. While we may offend by telling the truth, we should not offend in the way we tell it.

Phillip


----------



## ABondSlaveofChristJesus (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by pastorway_
> Just some random thoughts:
> 
> God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked.....why should we?
> ...



Should a evangelical christian school do this? Men may be sinners, but not all men are antichrist's.


----------



## lwadkins (Apr 5, 2005)

How is it that I should modify the truth as not to offend? And the pandering that is going on is only reinforcing the lies that are being told. It is precisely because it is the truth that it must be told. Yes he is a poor sinner and so am I, but it's not the poor sinner that is being eulogised, praised and exualted, it is the POPE.


----------



## pastorway (Apr 5, 2005)

nobody is suggesting modifying the truth - I am saying quite plainly to be careful in how you tell the truth. You can say the same words in many different ways. We should be telling the truth not to prove we are right and the pope is in hell.....we should be telling the truth about the gospel out of love and concern for souls. What is our motive? Our intended goal in conversation?

So many in the Catholic church idolize the Pope. He is dead. Would you tell anyone the day after their hero died that their hero was in hell for sure? We should comfort them in their grief and POINT THEM TO Christ.

Let's be clear to, posting an article or sermon on the web (like Al Mohler and James White have done) is different than a conversation with a friend or co-worker who is a catholic. Even then, we musy do what these men have done - when we talk about the issue, STICK TO THE GOSPEL.

As for the flags at half staff - President Bush has ordered all flags flown at half staff - http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/04/20050402-3.html - There is nothing that violates the Scripture in following this directive is there? 

Phillip


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Apr 5, 2005)

Hey Lawrence  Yes, the cyberworld - especially if you're reformed or Calvinistic - IS small.

Check my latest response on the list.

Matthew - I seem to have awoke the ire of a Catholic person on my discussion list with your essay:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RCC-Evangelical/message/20765

My response:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RCC-Evangelical/message/20766

I expect this one to generate traffic for a while.  Perhaps a good thing. Pray for wisdom so that I may answer properly.


----------



## Robin (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ABondSlaveofChristJesus_
> if I must? Think it wiser to just keep out of the controversy?



There are times, young-Tim, when one must decide which "hill" is best to die-on. Our Lord always defends His Own honor.



Robin


----------



## lwadkins (Apr 5, 2005)

Phillip,

I believe that, to at least some degree, we are talking past each other here, and maybe I haven't done a good job of being clear. Let me try this.

What I don't mean:
I don't mean that I take any joy in the destruction of the wicked and particularly the pope.
I don't mean that I'm going to run out and find the first catholic man or woman and proclaim to them that their pontif is in hell 
I don't mean I'm looking for an opportunity to proclaim the truth just so I can offend.
I don't mean I'm going to be as blunt and unkind as I can be when an opportunity arises to speak.
When I say truth, I don't mean "the pope is in hell."

What I do mean:
I do mean that is an unspeakable tragedy when someone dies unsaved.
I do mean by the "truth" the gospel of salvation that the Lord has commanded us to speak to make disciples of all nations.
I do mean by speaking the truth in love, to speak as kindly, lovinly and humbly as I know how, but not to avoid speaking because I am afraid for any reason including offending.
I do mean that I care not one whit whether I "am right in and of myself" only that I speak the plain truth of God's Word, which is right.

Now as to flying the flag at half mast and other observances. I am not comfortable with them being done to honor the office of POPE. I have no problem with observances meant to honor a poor miserable sinner who has died. I am not sure if the two can be seperated at this point. But as the earthly government is to govern both wheat and tares I can live with half mast although I think it reinforces the lies behind the papacy because it seem to endorse the office. I can't abide the idea of evangelical and reformed churches in any way seeming to honor the office of POPE, but have no problem with prayers for his family and friends.


----------



## Jie-Huli (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ABondSlaveofChristJesus_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by pastorway_
> ...



I would say definitely not. The lowering of flags clearly has a strong symbolic meaning, signifying that the school as an institution finds the Pope is especially worthy of honour and recognition. After all, humans die across the world every day, but the school does not lower the flags for everyone. So to lower the flags for the Pope is to assign him special honour. On what grounds should a "Christian" school honour the leader of a false religious system which is a blasphemy to the name of Christ? Can you imagine that the Reformers or Puritans would have lowered flags for the passing of a Pope?

We indeed take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but neither may we ascribe honour to them. 

Jie-huli


----------



## Me Died Blue (Apr 5, 2005)

Well put, Jie-Huli. We are _all_ ultimately grave sinners, and so honoring someone in such a sense is ultimately saying that they did great things for society _relative to_ other people, which is certainly proper to recognize for many people - but as you said, surely we have absolutely no reason to consider the Pope as worthy of any such recognition.


----------



## pastorway (Apr 5, 2005)

> _posted by Lon_
> What I do mean:
> I do mean that is an unspeakable tragedy when someone dies unsaved.
> I do mean by the "truth" the gospel of salvation that the Lord has commanded us to speak to make disciples of all nations.
> ...



Agreed


----------



## pastorway (Apr 5, 2005)

by the way, here is Dr. Al Mohler's blog today - he says what I want to say, only better:

(emphasis added)



> *John Paul II--The Man and His Legacy*
> 
> The death of Pope John Paul II brings one of the Roman Catholic Church's longest papal reigns to an end and closes the last chapter on one of the most significant lives of our times. *By any measure, John Paul II was one of the most influential figures on the world scene*, leading over a billion Roman Catholics worldwide and exercising a significant influence on world affairs during some of the most tumultuous decades of the 20th century.
> 
> ...



Well said.

Phillip


----------



## jenson75 (Apr 5, 2005)

This is an interesting line of discussion going on here. What is the difference if a head of state dies and we fly our flags at half mast and when the Pope dies? I thought he was head of his own "state"?

As for whether the Pope is in Hell, we will speak the truth and please let's practice some common sense. My Grandmother died a fine Buddhist, but if anyone here says to me she is in Hell, I will wished him to be there myself! That does not mean I do not know where she is, but it is a sensitive issue, not to be taken lightly.

So as much as I respect the essay written "Pope John Paul II is in Hell", I cannot endorse every word... I do not send someone to Hell, only God has the right to that.


----------



## JonathanHunt (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by jenson75_
> This is an interesting line of discussion going on here. What is the difference if a head of state dies and we fly our flags at half mast and when the Pope dies? I thought he was head of his own "state"?



Quite right Jenson. He is a Head of State and hence the flag flying is perfectly in order in my opinion!

Regarding the rest of your post, yes, it is a very sensitive issue, and I think perhaps we risk alienating people unneccesarily. I think what Matt is trying to do is to respond to all the 'the Pope was a wonderful christian' nonsense that is abounding. Apparently he spent his whole life proclaiming 'the true gospel' according to a priest I heard on radio five live. Its nonsense!

I personally agree that perhaps the term 'xxx is in hell' is not the best way of going about things.

JH


----------



## Jie-Huli (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by JonathanHunt_
> Quite right Jenson. He is a Head of State and hence the flag flying is perfectly in order in my opinion!
> JH



With due respect, I would disagree that this is the proper way to look at the question of the flag lowering at a "Christian" college.

Does anyone honestly believe that the college lowered the flag simply because the Pope was the head of some tiny little state? If the Prince of Monaco or some other little nation (or some _large_ nation outside of the US for that matter) were to die, do you think that the college would lower the flag for him? It seems clear that when a "Christian" college lowers the flag for a man who was principally the representative of a RELIGIOUS system, the school is making a RELIGIOUS statement, and it is this statement that I believe a true Christian college must not make.

We are not talking about government buildings lowering flags, but about a "Christian" school doing so. 

While I do not disagree with Philip's post above, in the sense that in individual conversations where we can speak clearly about such nuances we may express agreement with certain things the Pope did (those things, such as condemnation of abortion, which agree with the Bible's teachings) along with speaking of the tragedy of his dying without truly knowing the Lord, this does not equate with lowering flags for him. What is the message a Christian school sends when it does so? To me it is obvious that the message they are sending is that the Pope was worthy of very special honour, and when a religious institution says this they are presumably basing the honour on matters of religion. Therefore the ultimate message of lowering the flag is one of acceptance of the Pope's religion as true. I honestly cannot see anyway around this conclusion.

The school does not need to hang a banner that says he is in hell. The very existence of a Pope is a tragedy, and surely his death is as well, it is certainly a very grave subject not to be taken lightly. But to give him special recognition and honours is an ecumenical compromise of the pure Gospel, in my opinion.


----------



## jenson75 (Apr 5, 2005)

Quote "Does anyone honestly believe that the college lowered the flag simply because the Pope was the head of some tiny little state?"


Are you sure the Pope is the head of some tiny little state? Money, power, influence, ambassadors, army, and a whole 1700 years of history marked by violence, corruption, greed, even wars. Is that a sign of a "tiny, little state"? Geographically, yes (that is debatable)... but....



Quote "We are not talking about government buildings lowering flags, but about a "Christian" school doing so. 



Whether the "Christian" school choose to lower its flag is up to them (personally, I would not). We need to be sensitive in situations like this. What is the government's policy? What about the RC students in the school? We want to convert them, but a show of disrespect by not flying the flag at half-mast will lead (inevitably) to some becoming more hardened against the Gospel (I assume the "Christian" school is an interdenominational type).



[Edited on 4-5-2005 by jenson75]

[Edited on 4-5-2005 by jenson75]


----------



## ABondSlaveofChristJesus (Apr 5, 2005)

I posted my thoughts aganst the pope office and in lowering the flag to honor an antichrist on my school forum. I did this as respectful as I could, yet everyone attacked me like crazy. My biggest pet peeve is when people assert without any clear understanding on what they are asserting. While I posted a huge explanation with scripture nad historic theologians, people would just simply say "your ignorant" and then leave it be with no substance shown. I am so warry of this...


----------



## Arch2k (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Jie-Huli_
> But to give him special recognition and honours is an ecumenical compromise of the pure Gospel, in my opinion.





The Pope may have done things that were OUTWARDLY good (good in the sight of men), but if he died without the gospel, they were not good in the eyes of God.

I have to agree with Jie-Huli that the Puritans would have gasped at the idea of honoring the ANTI-Christ! Of all people to honor. George Tiller is influential in my city and to thousands of women around the country, but I would consider it a tradgedy to honor him with a half-staff even though he does SOME things that are outwardly good! He attends "REFORMATION LUTHERAN CHURCH." He tithes his blood money. He contributes to the economy. Yet when it comes to the gospel and anything pretaing to Godliness, the Pope and George Tiller are alike in that they ONLY do damage and perversion.


----------



## ChristianTrader (Apr 5, 2005)

Would we fly flags at half staff for Hitler just because he was a head of state? On top of that Hitler for the most part just killed bodies. We are talking about an out and out soul destroyer.

CT


----------



## lwadkins (Apr 5, 2005)

A lot of the agrument here is based on the idea of "seperating the man form the office of POPE." And as nice as it sounds that we should honor the man for his courageous stands on the issues of morality and against communism, I think in the end it will be impossible to seperate Karol Wojtyla from Pope John Paul II. As a practical issue to laud one will appear to be lauding the other and so in a convoluted way also the office of POPE. And so also will be seen as an affirmation of Roman Catholicism. Intentions are great but we also have to consider the practical outworkings of our actions. What we mean by our words is not always what is understood and in this particular instance I think the danger of being misunderstood on this issue is acute.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Apr 5, 2005)

A friend of mine read Matt's article and said that it didn't give John Paul any credit for his accomplishments. I advised that Matt's intent wasn't to write a biography.

At any rate, I think a good way to keep his pluses and minuses in perspective is to remember Pope John Paul II as follows:
"Pope John Paul II was an anti-homosexual, pro-family, pro-life, pro-democracy anti-Christ."


----------



## Arch2k (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by SolaScriptura_
> A friend of mine read Matt's article and said that it didn't give John Paul any credit for his accomplishments. I advised that Matt's intent wasn't to write a biography.
> 
> At any rate, I think a good way to keep his pluses and minuses in perspective is to remember Pope John Paul II as follows:
> "Pope John Paul II was an anti-homosexual, pro-family, pro-life, pro-democracy anti-Christ."





That is just hilarious


----------



## BobVigneault (Apr 5, 2005)

Thank you Ben for a kinder and gentler summary.


----------



## just_grace (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> With all the nonsense the media is portraying, I had to write "something." A short blurb:
> 
> The Pope is in Hell
> ...



God alone is Judge and has authority to cast into Gehenna, ( Hell is the english translation ) the lake of fire that burns for ever and ever. Shut out from His Glorious Presence...yes a Hell indeed.

"Judge not, that you be not judged"

( quote ) The Lord Jesus Christ. Those who crucified the lamb were wicked, but Jesus said "forgive them Father, they know not what they do" 

While I hate sin and unrighteousness I sometimes wonder the spirit of this board.

Try to spend less time condemning people and more time displaying Gods boundless Love and Grace. And dont forget to tell someone about Christ tomorrow. 'God has a work to do and we must help Him.'

David


----------



## just_grace (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> With all the nonsense the media is portraying, I had to write "something." A short blurb:
> 
> The Pope is in Hell
> ...



God alone is Judge and has authority to cast into Gehenna, ( Hell is the english translation ) the lake of fire that burns for ever and ever. Shut out from His Glorious Presence...yes a Hell indeed.

"Judge not, that you be not judged"

( quote ) The Lord Jesus Christ. Those who crucified the lamb were wicked, but Jesus said "forgive them Father, they know not what they do" 

While I hate sin and unrighteousness I sometimes wonder the spirit of this board.

Try to spend less time condemning people and more time displaying Gods boundless Love and Grace. And dont forget to tell someone about Christ tomorrow. 'God has a work to do and we must help Him.'

David


----------



## just_grace (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> With all the nonsense the media is portraying, I had to write "something." A short blurb:
> 
> The Pope is in Hell
> ...



God alone is Judge and has authority to cast into Gehenna, ( Hell is the english translation ) the lake of fire that burns for ever and ever. Shut out from His Glorious Presence...yes a Hell indeed.

"Judge not, that you be not judged"

( quote ) The Lord Jesus Christ. Those who crucified the lamb were wicked, but Jesus said "forgive them Father, they know not what they do" 

While I hate sin and unrighteousness I sometimes wonder the spirit of this board.

Try to spend less time condemning people and more time displaying Gods boundless Love and Grace. And dont forget to tell someone about Christ tomorrow. 'God has a work to do and we must help Him.'

David


----------



## BobVigneault (Apr 5, 2005)

I feel I should say something nice about the pope.

After all, I was christened in the mother church as an infant. My priest used to tuck me in and say the rosary on Saturday nights after he and my dad would fill the evening with boozing. 

We would talk about my future as a priest. At 12 I kissed the bishops ring in confirmation of my faith. I finished 12 years of RCC catechism. I went to the vatican and was blessed by Pope Paul.

So my conscience is pricked and I am compelled to defend the pontiff. 

So here is is, I will put JP 2's frequent flyer miles up against Calvin's, Luther's, Swingli's and Knox's. Take that protest-ants! 

(463 posts!)


----------



## just_grace (Apr 5, 2005)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> With all the nonsense the media is portraying, I had to write "something." A short blurb:
> 
> The Pope is in Hell
> ...



God alone is Judge and has authority to cast into Gehenna, ( Hell is the english translation ) the lake of fire that burns for ever and ever. Shut out from His Glorious Presence...yes a Hell indeed.

"Judge not, that you be not judged"

( quote ) The Lord Jesus Christ. Those who crucified the lamb were wicked, but Jesus said "forgive them Father, they know not what they do" 

While I hate sin and unrighteousness I sometimes wonder the spirit of this board.

Try to spend less time condemning people and more time displaying Gods boundless Love and Grace. And dont forget to tell someone about Christ tomorrow. 'God has a work to do and we must help Him.'

David


----------



## BobVigneault (Apr 5, 2005)

David,
Christ has done the work and he appoints us to preach the gospel which the Spirit applies to those called by the Father according to His purpose.

It's been said before but I'll repeat it, Matt's language may have been politically incorrect but his teaching was clear. He presented the gospel. He used the occasion of the popes death as an opportunity to both cut through the nonsense and present the true gospel.

There is nothing so crushing as watching the gospel blurred, buried, corrupted, morphed and missed. Since the pope took ill the gospel has been under these assaults. Matt has attacked the spirit and work of anti-Christ whose message has been amplified and dignified by the media and the papal followers. 

You may not have liked Matt's language, but the truth was clear and scriptural. It got peoples attention. I would have preferred it remain closed circuit to the board but Matt's article was not judging the pope, it was judging a false gospel and the system that perpetuates it.

[Edited on 4-5-2005 by maxdetail]


----------



## just_grace (Apr 5, 2005)

I do not think Christ would argue with you, He would just say that you do not know what spirit you are of.

I apologize if I have been flippant here.

David


----------



## BobVigneault (Apr 5, 2005)

> He would just say that you do not know what spirit you are of.



David, that is the whole argument. The pope's teachings and Vaticans 1 and 2 are definitely teachings of a different spirit, the spirit of anti-Christ.

If by spirit you mean 'sentiment' then I can understand someone being offended, but if by spirit you mean the Holy Spirit verses anti-Christ then again I have to disagree with you. Matt is representing the Spirit's teaching in the Scriptures.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Apr 5, 2005)

David, why did you make so many repeat posts at different times?



> _Originally posted by just_grace_
> God alone is Judge and has authority to cast into Gehenna, ( Hell is the english translation ) the lake of fire that burns for ever and ever. Shut out from His Glorious Presence...yes a Hell indeed.



Indeed, God alone has authority to cast into hell, but He has also revealed to us in His Word the standard by which He does so, which is faith in the Gospel.



> _Originally posted by just_grace_
> "Judge not, that you be not judged"



This has to be one of the most mis-used verses in Scripture. Notice the context in Matthew 7:



> Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, "Let me take the speck out of your eye," when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.



The context in which Christ is warning people not to judge is that _they will be judged by the same standard_. With that in mind, by what standard are Matt and others on this board judging the Pope? The standard of _faith in the Gospel_ - and none of us have any reason to be afraid of being judged by that standard, for we all meet that standard in Christ and will thus pass the judgment test by that standard on the Last Day. But the Pope perpetually denied that Gospel, which is why we can biblically judge him by that standard. So going by that standard and paralleling the above passage, does Matt or do any of us have a log in our eyes so great that it makes the Pope's complete denial of the Gospel a mere speck in comparison? Hardly - for that is the greatest log one can have.




> _Originally posted by just_grace_
> ( quote ) The Lord Jesus Christ. Those who crucified the lamb were wicked, but Jesus said "forgive them Father, they know not what they do"



Those who were crucifying Him were still living past that point and thus had a possibility of being redeemed. Likewise, we continue to earnestly and charitably pray for the repentance and redemption of those Roman Catholics still alive. But the Pope is now dead, and has clearly rejected the Gospel with no future chance of repentance remaining.



> _Originally posted by just_grace_
> Try to spend less time condemning people and more time displaying Gods boundless Love and Grace. And dont forget to tell someone about Christ tomorrow. 'God has a work to do and we must help Him.'



It indeed would be unhealthy and unbalanced to focus on the condemnation of the wicked without a subsequent Gospel presentation - but we must remember that the former is just as necessary for the latter as the latter is for the former, for without a realization of their corruption, people have no need for a Gospel to embrace. And in Matt's article, he did indeed give a presentation of the true Gospel in discussing the Pope's denial of it, and hopefully Roman Catholics who read it will be granted repentance to accept the Gospel presented therein through the Word.

Also, while we should also not focus solely on the condemnation of deceivers passed away, one as deceptive and blasphemous as the Pope certainly warrants such a rebuke and warning, _especially_ in light of all the current abounding confusion evidenced by the false moral credit evangelicals and Catholics alike are currently giving him, which is actually why Matt said he wrote his piece in the first place.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Apr 5, 2005)

"Judge not, that you be not judged"

Let's look at that a bit more closer:

Matthew 7:1-5 "Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and *then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye. *

Christ says that we are not to be HYPOPCRITICAL when we judge, not that we are not to judge at all. And this has nothing to do with false teachers. It is referring to "brothers." There is a world of differecne. For example, If I lie, and rebuke someone else for thier lying, while at the same time am lying, then I am judging in the worng way (thought he judgment may be right). It has nothing to do whatsoever with doing "away" with judgment. By your post (AND email), you made TWO judgements. 

"Those who crucified the lamb were wicked, but Jesus said "forgive them Father, they know not what they do."

What does that have to do with a false teacher, or someone antichristian? Would you really say that Christ allowed false teaching or was sympathetic to it? Not at all. Brief examples:

Matthew 23:33 You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?

Matthew 12:34 You brood of vipers! How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.

2 Peter 2:1 2 Peter 2:1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.


"While I hate sin and unrighteousness I sometimes wonder the spirit of this board."

What spirit might that be? You are not being very clear.

"Try to spend less time condemning people and more time displaying Gods boundless Love and Grace. And dont forget to tell someone about Christ tomorrow. 'God has a work to do and we must help Him.'"

I would simply ask - what is love?

John 14:23 Jesus answered him, "If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.

John 14:21 Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him." 

2 John 1:6 And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; 

1 John 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome.

Thus, was the pope a deciever or not? He was. Of the highest measure.


----------



## Robin (Apr 6, 2005)

A reminder, from those great Reformed theologians, The Talking Heads, on _Life During_ (Spiritual) _Wartime_

This ain´t no party, this ain´t no disco,
This ain´t no fooling around
No time for dancing, or lovey dovey,
I ain´t got time for that now



R.


----------



## The Lamb (Apr 7, 2005)

Matt:

In your last post, I must ask, do you make a practice of answering everything with a question? 

I say, Matthew, Love your enemies, you say, What is Love?

I say:Matthew do not judge.
you say, What does it mean to judge?

Matthew, what Spirit did you write that with?
you say "Joseph what Spirit do you mean?

Where did you learn this tactic? I am serious, you use it extremely well and if one did not have control, I could see why one may want to scream. On a good day, I would last about 10 minutes without laughing and walking away.


Just a little aside to take the focus off your article and the pope.

And I know everyone that judges harshly and "Scriptually" (notice the quotes) Love to say "Matt 7 has to be taken in context. It does not mean what it says. Do you ever notice that the only ones who say that are spending the time seperating the sheep and the goats?

I did not read "your" article because instead of worrying about who is in hell, and finding error, I would much rather spend time reading an article you wrote promoting God alone. I could go to paisley or chicks site and read this stuff.

[Edited on 4-7-2005 by The Lamb]


----------



## Average Joey (Apr 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by OS_X_
> I'm standing right next to Matthew.
> 
> Only thing, I posted my take on it on a non-Christian message board.
> ...



Kerry that`s even braver since it wasn`t on a Christian board.


----------



## BobVigneault (Apr 7, 2005)

> In your last post, I must ask, do you make a practice of answering everything with a question?



Hey Joseph, good use of infinite regress! Matthew asks some questions and then you answer him with a non-sequitur and then add some more questions. This will go on for a bit and then one of you will say, "Oh yeah, well.....infinity".

You have got to cool down friend. The enemy isn't in here, he's out there.


----------



## The Lamb (Apr 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by maxdetail_
> 
> 
> > In your last post, I must ask, do you make a practice of answering everything with a question?
> ...




I was beeing quite cool and serious Bob. I have noticed it and it works. I know the enemy is not here. I guess I am tired of this "Is he in hell, is he not" debate everywhere I go on the web.

GOd knows. I have enough to worry about in my own walk to take more than 3 minutes to determine this about anyone.

What fruits can possibly come from this type of discussion? I, for the life of me, cannot find one person doing this in all of the Holy Writ. If it is there I need to have someone show me. 

In fact, quiet the opposite happens. When the Apostles questioned Jesus about His dealings with certain sinners, He rebuked them.

"Repent, or ye shall likewise perish"


Joseph


----------



## BobVigneault (Apr 7, 2005)

Joseph, even Paul had his hot buttons as we learn in Galatians. He was telling fine church leaders that they should emasculate themselves and I'm being more polite than he is.

This thread is dying. Let's let it die. I have read a quote by a so called evangelical on Dobson's site that 'the pope embodied the Gospel in a unique way". That's a hot button in a community like this. There is no salvation outside of the gospel and to have the pope referred to as the embodiment of the gospel is so very frustrating and blasphemous.

Matt cut to the chase and you and I wouldn't have used the same language. It created a dialogue, it offended and it encouraged.

One of my favorite sermons is Rolfe Barnard's "The God that Kills People". Man, that got your attention. It was harsh but it got right to the meat of the matter. God is sovereign. Can we agree Joseph that Matt spoke the gospel truth but he used a dedactic method that you and I would not have?

I did not see hate in his article but a call to those who blindly follow a man, who could most likely fit the office of 'the anti-Christ', and instead turn to the only means of salvation. 

I don't want this topic to become an occasion for condescending and snipping remarks about one another.

Let's let this thread die. Maybe we could start another thread about whether or not the pro-life stance of the RCC is but a trojan horse scheme to infiltrate the protestant church and diminish the gospel. We could start that one.... but I'm not going to.

Blessings Joseph

[Edited on 4-7-2005 by maxdetail]


----------



## fredtgreco (Apr 7, 2005)

Maybe we should stop discussing John Paul's person, and the fact that his theology is infecting the *Reformed* community:

http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=10371


----------



## BobVigneault (Apr 7, 2005)

"Repent, or ye shall likewise perish"

BTW, the context for that passage was to answer the question "Why do bad things happen to 'good' people?"

Jesus wasn't dealing with sinners in that passage. On the other had, Jesus was always dealing with sinners, of whom I am chief.


----------



## The Lamb (Apr 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by maxdetail_
> "Repent, or ye shall likewise perish"
> 
> BTW, the context for that passage was to answer the question "Why do bad things happen to 'good' people?"
> ...




I disagree. Jesus called them sinners. Do you suppose that these Galileans were worse sinners than all other Galileans?

We normally think of some people as "good," and some people as "bad," and believe that God should allow good things to happen to good people and bad things to bad people. Jesus dispels this notion.
But Jesus´ point is not that the Galileans in question were innocent; they were simply not more guilty than the others. All are guilty.

The lesson is still the same Bob. :bigsmile:


----------



## lwadkins (Apr 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> Maybe we should stop discussing John Paul's person, and the fact that his theology is infecting the *Reformed* community:
> 
> http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=10371



To me this is exactly the problem with the protestant community trying so hard to exalt the man, separate from the office of POPE. It will be misunderstood as respect for the office of POPE and the catholic church, thus seeming to give affirmation to those teachings.


----------



## The Lamb (Apr 7, 2005)

> _Originally posted by lwadkins_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> ...




Is proclaiming with the apparent authority of Scripture that so and so is in hell maintaining what you are suggesting Lon?

For me to say, I do not know for sure where he is, does not exalt the man, or give credence to the apostate RCC


----------



## Ken S. (Apr 7, 2005)

Mattew, "The Pope is in Hell" is really good! I've printed one copy already, and is thinking of whether I'm able to translate it to Chinese. Just a thought. I'm not good in English anyway.

Again I shall say that I'm very glad to be here, reading Puritanboard's messages. Really nice to be communicating with you all.

Mattew, really like your article, really brave and really well researched, maybe it's exctly the message some protestants are in need of at the moment. 

By the way, I can see that you know much about history of Church and Catholicism, envy you. If I were you, know as much as you do, I would have done a lot for the churches in Hong Kong. Hong Kong is probably the worst Chinese city througout the whole country where the protestant and catholic relations is the closest. People like me got lot to do, or to fight, in the future. There are very few Reformed church in Hong Kong, you know.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Apr 22, 2005)

Ken, 

Never give up brother. At the very least, pray for them. God can use prayer mightily. I am often shamed for not praying as fervently as I ought for matters such as these. But those things that God places on your heart and ministry, do them with all your might!


----------

