Antichrist Named Time's "Person of the Year"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just proves we are not fighting against flesh and blood.
but against principalities and powers!
 
It is interesting to me how many of the mainline PC(USA) "conservative" Presbyterian ministers that I went to seminary with are falling in love with Pope Francis I. I see his comments and stories about his work posted constantly on my fb page. I expect the liberal PC(USA) folks to post his comments on capitalism et al, but it was fascinating how many of them were reading and quoting his "book" that recently came out.
 
Keep in mind that Time has as its criteria the person who has most influenced or changed the world... for good or for bad. Both heroes and villians have been selected in years past. Supposedly, the selection is not to be seen as any kind of endorsement or appreciation for a person, just recognition of their influence (from a worldly point of view, of course).

Given some of the surprising things this pope has said and done I could make a case for Time's choice being the right one. A shift in the stance of the Catholic church, on social issues alone, could indeed influence policies and attitudes all over the world.
 
If it turns out that he's the last Pope, Time will have been correct to identify him as a man of great historical significance.

You never know. The Papacy isn't going to continue until the end of time, anyway.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2
 
It is interesting to me how many of the mainline PC(USA) "conservative" Presbyterian ministers that I went to seminary with are falling in love with Pope Francis I. I see his comments and stories about his work posted constantly on my fb page. I expect the liberal PC(USA) folks to post his comments on capitalism et al, but it was fascinating how many of them were reading and quoting his "book" that recently came out.

I have said similar things, it concerns me the number of evangelicals and even a few people who consider themselves Reformed who seem to have a giddy school girl infatuation with Francis. From the very beginning I felt the reason the RCC put him in the position was to bring those mainline-ers and evangelical who see Social Justice as the focus of Christianity into Rome. It was brilliant move on there part.
 
Speaking of Mandela (post #2), I was not aware of his life, but this shockingly brought it home: Nelson Mandela: Secular Saint Gone to His Reward! « Don Boys. It this accurate?
Yes that is accurate.
He was a communist terrorist who never repudiated his use or any use of violence to accomplish political ends. Amnesty International refused to help because he wasn't a political prisoner and had a fair trial. Many newspapers and nations at the time said "wow! what a lenient sentence! We would have executed him here for that."
 
I've never been impressed with Mandela.

He had such power and adulation after he became president that one word from him among the "international community" could have brought his friend Robert Mugabe to heel, but he seems to have done nothing.

I presume the hard-headed Boer politicians, such as de Klerk, must have received some kind of undertakings from him and his main men, that he had turned from violence and wasn't going to unleash mayhem when he was released?

His release followed hard on the heels of the collapse of Communism's heartland, which made certain things possible which before were unthinkable. So many extreme "right wing" movements like apartheid were motivated and/or fuelled by fear of Communism.
 
Last edited:
The Pope just has to burp and they show a segment on the TV news here in Australia about it. Worlds sure getting all Pope'y again isn't it!
 
Unfortunately uphere in Sydney,Australia we have the same bias in our news & tv as well,maybe the Jesuits have taken control of all the media for his hellishness, our politics is controlled up here as we'll, dang we never should have brought in all those Irish Catholic Convicts :D
 
Not really surprising, the late C. Gregg Singer said that a Church which abandons it's creed will always substitute it with a hierarchy.
 
dang we never should have brought in all those Irish Catholic Convicts

Would you like a kiwi perspective? In Australia it is almost impossible to distinguish convicts from non-convicts isn't it? :lol: :lol:

particularly now when we have a lot of kiwis here who sponge off our welfare & medicare, on a brighter note have you ever noticed how the pirate accent sounds a lot like an Irishman with a sore throat ahhhhh !

Stephen I'm gonna have to send you a friends request just so I can keep your disparaging remarks about Australia & Australians under observation, keep up the good work :D
 
Do you all really think it is going to be the last Pope?

I personally do not think Francis is the last pope (he is pretty old). I also think a pope will be in office when Jesus comes again with His saints. I am not sure what Richard meant by saying "The Papacy isn't going to continue until the end of time, anyway". Richard?
 
Do you all really think it is going to be the last Pope?

I personally do not think Francis is the last pope (he is pretty old). I also think a pope will be in office when Jesus comes again with His saints. I am not sure what Richard meant by saying "The Papacy isn't going to continue until the end of time, anyway". Richard?

Oh, it's just my postmil fantasies coming out ;)

You could do worse than read Patrick Fairbairn's "Interpretation of Prophecy" and David Brown's "Christ's Second Coming Will it be Premillennial?" on this topic.

I don't know if this is the last pope, but if he engages in serious reform, he always might precipitate the unravelling of the system. Remember Gorbachev.

If you're saying that the Roman Church will be here until the end of time, you're agreeing with its doctrine that the Roman Church is "indefectible".

See Q.191 of the Larger Catechism on this subject. We don't pray for things with no possible prospect of success, as these would be outwith God's will.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2
 
If you're saying that the Roman Church will be here until the end of time, you're agreeing with its doctrine that the Roman Church is "indefectible".

See Q.191 of the Larger Catechism on this subject. We don't pray for things with no possible prospect of success, as these would be outwith God's will.

Of course I will pray for evil to cease and I know that when Jesus comes it will be vanquished along with the evil empire of Rome. :) That is my amil realization coming through. ;)
 
If you're saying that the Roman Church will be here until the end of time, you're agreeing with its doctrine that the Roman Church is "indefectible".

See Q.191 of the Larger Catechism on this subject. We don't pray for things with no possible prospect of success, as these would be outwith God's will.

Of course I will pray for evil to cease and I know that when Jesus comes it will be vanquished along with the evil empire of Rome. :) That is my amil realization coming through. ;)

If you're amil you have to agree with the Pope that the Roman Church is indefectible? That's a new one on me ;) They should emphasise it more in books on amil eschatology, and they could receive the imprimatur of Pope Francis ;) I suppose it ties in with the amil view that eschatology is so realised that nothing of any great significance or improvement is going to happen between now and the end of time.

I believe in realised eschatology too, but not static eschatology. The true Church has made great progress under Christ since eschatology was realised in the first century.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2
 
If you're amil you have to agree with the Pope that the Roman Church is indefectible? That's a new one on me ;) They should emphasise it more in books on amil eschatology, and they could receive the imprimatur of Pope Francis ;) I suppose it ties in with the amil view that eschatology is so realised that nothing of any great significance or improvement is going to happen between now and the end of time.

I believe in realised eschatology too, but not static eschatology. The true Church has made great progress under Christ since eschatology was realised in the first century.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2

For starters I do not recognize the RC church as a real or true church. So if they are around (I think they will be) the real church will be here, like the ones we attend, and their claims hold nothing over me so far as being around at the end of time since they are not a real church. I currently am a pessimistic amil that believes it will only get worse till Jesus comes. :)
 
particularly now when we have a lot of kiwis here who sponge off our welfare & medicare
I understand the Australian Government has put a stop to that

Stephen I'm gonna have to send you a friends request just so I can keep your disparaging remarks about Australia & Australians under observation
I apologise. I am of IRISH stock as well as from NZ's leading Irish region, so a little strange ;)

On a positive note I am reading the Australian theologian Graeme Goldsworthy. Excellent stuff. He has switched from the NIV to the ESV so it is proof he is a great Australian :p
 
If you're amil you have to agree with the Pope that the Roman Church is indefectible? That's a new one on me ;) They should emphasise it more in books on amil eschatology, and they could receive the imprimatur of Pope Francis ;) I suppose it ties in with the amil view that eschatology is so realised that nothing of any great significance or improvement is going to happen between now and the end of time.

I believe in realised eschatology too, but not static eschatology. The true Church has made great progress under Christ since eschatology was realised in the first century.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2

For starters I do not recognize the RC church as a real or true church. So if they are around (I think they will be) the real church will be here, like the ones we attend, and their claims hold nothing over me so far as being around at the end of time since they are not a real church. I currently am a pessimistic amil that believes it will only get worse till Jesus comes. :)

I'm interested to know why you think the Roman Church will last until the end of the world? Is that just a hunch because it has lasted so long, or because of something in Scripture?

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2
 
If you're amil you have to agree with the Pope that the Roman Church is indefectible? That's a new one on me ;) They should emphasise it more in books on amil eschatology, and they could receive the imprimatur of Pope Francis ;) I suppose it ties in with the amil view that eschatology is so realised that nothing of any great significance or improvement is going to happen between now and the end of time.

I believe in realised eschatology too, but not static eschatology. The true Church has made great progress under Christ since eschatology was realised in the first century.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2

For starters I do not recognize the RC church as a real or true church. So if they are around (I think they will be) the real church will be here, like the ones we attend, and their claims hold nothing over me so far as being around at the end of time since they are not a real church. I currently am a pessimistic amil that believes it will only get worse till Jesus comes. :)

This conversation you 2 have had is quite interesting, as I was previously a Historicist Post-Mill myself who has moved to an
Amill position so I can see where your both coming from.

I don't believe that the RC "church" is a church any longer having thought on that matter pre Trent it was the Catholic Church Apostate & post Trent having denied The Gospel & condemned it, it became the Catholic Church Reprobate, this would have implication with accepting their "baptism" pre Trent yes,post Trent not, just to veer off subject!

the problem I found was that in Rev 20 the word thousand is mentioned 6 times which tends to make you want lean to a
Post-Mill Interpretation & take it more literally though Revelation is a Symbolic Prophetic book so if you hold to it being
a symbolic thousand, despite the 6 references you will take the A-Mill position.

I believe the crux of the matter lies with the interpretation of 2 Thess 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

does the Coming of The Lord here refer to a general Old Testament like coming in judgment, like Matt 24 which was fulfilled in the Destruction of Jerusalem AD 70 or does it refer to the actual Second Coming of Our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ,our blessed Hope, if it is the former you will tend to a Post-Mill Interpretation if the latter you will be decisively A-Mill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top