Backwoods Presbyterian
Puritanboard Amanuensis
Simple Question.
(Like anything on the PB could be simple
)
(Like anything on the PB could be simple
)
Do You Believe the Papacy to be the Anti-Christ?
- Thread starter Backwoods Presbyterian
- Start date
- Status
Ummm....
I guess I'd say he is one of many antichrists, but I'm an amil Riddlebargerite and probably we will see in the future a culmination of all the antichrists in a final most awful one. I'm speculating he'll be Islamic, as Islam and Mohammed is even more antiChrist than the Catholic church ever was. Perhaps the Pope and Islam will shack up in the spiritual bed together.
I appreciate you posting this as I now realize I have a disagreement with the WCF here. I will look forward to reading the replies.
I guess I'd say he is one of many antichrists, but I'm an amil Riddlebargerite and probably we will see in the future a culmination of all the antichrists in a final most awful one. I'm speculating he'll be Islamic, as Islam and Mohammed is even more antiChrist than the Catholic church ever was. Perhaps the Pope and Islam will shack up in the spiritual bed together.
I appreciate you posting this as I now realize I have a disagreement with the WCF here. I will look forward to reading the replies.
ReformedChapin
Puritan Board Freshman
I think that the old papacy certainly was I'm not too sure about the new one.
Backwoods Presbyterian
Puritanboard Amanuensis
The American revision of 1789 took out of the Westminster Confession of 1646 this notation as the Pope as Anti-Christ.
As far as the "new one" if anything the Popes since 1563 (Council of Trent) and 1870 (Vatican I) have moved in a direction that more blatantly fits 2 Thess 2.
As far as the "new one" if anything the Popes since 1563 (Council of Trent) and 1870 (Vatican I) have moved in a direction that more blatantly fits 2 Thess 2.
Last edited:
Poimen
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I voted for the third option only because 2 Thessalonians 2 does not speak of the Antichrist but rather the "man of sin (lawless one)". In other words one has to assume that he should be identified as or be equal to the Antichrist (1 John 2,4; 2 John 7) which is not readily apparent.
And, for the record, no I do not believe that the pope and/or papacy is the Antichrist.
And, for the record, no I do not believe that the pope and/or papacy is the Antichrist.
kvanlaan
Puritan Board Doctor
Perhaps 'an' anti-Christ and not 'the' anti-Christ, as an userper of the office. It does seem to fit in many ways - the notes in my Geneva talk about "a throne set up clean contrary to Christ's glory, wherein that wicked man shall sit and transfer all things that appertain to God, to himself, and many shall fall away from God to him" and "By speaking of one, he pointed out the body of the tyrannous and persecuting Church".
jambo
Puritan Board Senior
I believe the papacy to be anti-Christ but I do not believe the papacy to be the anti-Christ.
Whilst in the Irish Republic the local church formed a committee to write a church constitution. The committee was made of 4 men from within the church and all local believers along with the church planter (English), pastor (Irish) and myself (Scottish). We adopted the 1689 baptist confession and as leaders we suggested removal of the paragraph which stated the pope was the ani-Christ.
None of the local believers would accept its removal however. I was amazed as each local believer was converted from Catholicism, their families were all practicing RCs and much of their culture revolved asround the RC church. Also being in a small Irish town having a paragraph about the pope being the anti-Christ might cause problems. So we kept it in at the request of the local believers.
As I said in the first line, the papacy fits the description but I do not believe it to be the anti-Christ. It is a weakening church that now recognises some RC countries as missionfields themselves. ie France, Spain etc
Whilst in the Irish Republic the local church formed a committee to write a church constitution. The committee was made of 4 men from within the church and all local believers along with the church planter (English), pastor (Irish) and myself (Scottish). We adopted the 1689 baptist confession and as leaders we suggested removal of the paragraph which stated the pope was the ani-Christ.
None of the local believers would accept its removal however. I was amazed as each local believer was converted from Catholicism, their families were all practicing RCs and much of their culture revolved asround the RC church. Also being in a small Irish town having a paragraph about the pope being the anti-Christ might cause problems. So we kept it in at the request of the local believers.
As I said in the first line, the papacy fits the description but I do not believe it to be the anti-Christ. It is a weakening church that now recognises some RC countries as missionfields themselves. ie France, Spain etc
According to my notes, the PCUSA retained it over a century until the 1903 changes.
Rich Koster
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I believe that the whole of scripture shows the Papacy as anti Christ
The Pope can only forgive someone who sins against him. He makes a blasphemous claim as "Vicar of Christ".
The Pope can only forgive someone who sins against him. He makes a blasphemous claim as "Vicar of Christ".
ManleyBeasley
Puritan Board Junior
Vicar=Latin
Vice=English
Anti=Greek
Anti=Vicar
Vice=English
Anti=Greek
Anti=Vicar
Rich Koster
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Vicarius Filii Dei If I remember correctly.
Rangerus
Puritan Board Junior
I agree with many on here, the papacy is anti-Christ. It even perhaps will someday be the office of the anti-Christ.
I believe that lawlessness will continue to get worse and worse, and people who have stopped going to churches where they heard the gospel are wide open to the cults and the "isms" of our day.
Here is what Wikipedia says.
Polycarp warned the Philippians that everyone that preached false doctrine was an antichrist.
Irenaeus speculated that it was “very probable” the Antichrist might be called Lateinos, which is Greek for “Latin Man”.
John Chrysostom warned against speculations and old wives' tales about the Antichrist, saying, “Let us not therefore enquire into these things”. He preached that by knowing Paul's description of the Antichrist in 2 Thessalonians Christians would avoid deception.
Augustine of Hippo wrote “it is uncertain in what temple [the Antichrist] shall sit, whether in that ruin of the temple which was built by Solomon, or in the Church.”
Hippolytus of Rome held that the Antichrist would come from the tribe of Dan and would rebuild the Jewish temple in order to reign from it. He identified the Antichrist with the Beast out of the Earth from the book of Revelation.
Tertullian held that the Roman Empire was the restraining force written about by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:7-8. The fall of Rome and the disintegration of the ten provinces of the Roman Empire into ten kingdoms were to make way for the Antichrist.
Pope Gregory I wrote in A.D. 597, “I say with confidence that whoever calls or desires to call himself ‘universal priest’ in self-exaltation of himself is a precursor of the Antichrist.”
Archbishop Arnulf of Rheims wrote in A.D. 991, "What do you estimate this to be, reverend fathers? When you see him sitting on a lofty throne glittering in purple and gold, what do you estimate this to be, I say? Without a doubt, if he lacks love, and is only swelled up and lifted up, must he not be the Antichrist, 'sitting in the temple of God, and also showing himself as God'?"
I believe that lawlessness will continue to get worse and worse, and people who have stopped going to churches where they heard the gospel are wide open to the cults and the "isms" of our day.
Here is what Wikipedia says.
Polycarp warned the Philippians that everyone that preached false doctrine was an antichrist.
Irenaeus speculated that it was “very probable” the Antichrist might be called Lateinos, which is Greek for “Latin Man”.
John Chrysostom warned against speculations and old wives' tales about the Antichrist, saying, “Let us not therefore enquire into these things”. He preached that by knowing Paul's description of the Antichrist in 2 Thessalonians Christians would avoid deception.
Augustine of Hippo wrote “it is uncertain in what temple [the Antichrist] shall sit, whether in that ruin of the temple which was built by Solomon, or in the Church.”
Hippolytus of Rome held that the Antichrist would come from the tribe of Dan and would rebuild the Jewish temple in order to reign from it. He identified the Antichrist with the Beast out of the Earth from the book of Revelation.
Tertullian held that the Roman Empire was the restraining force written about by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:7-8. The fall of Rome and the disintegration of the ten provinces of the Roman Empire into ten kingdoms were to make way for the Antichrist.
Pope Gregory I wrote in A.D. 597, “I say with confidence that whoever calls or desires to call himself ‘universal priest’ in self-exaltation of himself is a precursor of the Antichrist.”
Archbishop Arnulf of Rheims wrote in A.D. 991, "What do you estimate this to be, reverend fathers? When you see him sitting on a lofty throne glittering in purple and gold, what do you estimate this to be, I say? Without a doubt, if he lacks love, and is only swelled up and lifted up, must he not be the Antichrist, 'sitting in the temple of God, and also showing himself as God'?"
timmopussycat
Puritan Board Junior
Presbyterian Deacon
Puritan Board Graduate
The Answer of Luther and Calvin to this is "YES!"
Is the Pope the Antichrist?
Here is Martin Luther's answer:
"Since the Pope is a heretic, and idolater, Antichrist, and the red whore reeking with the blood of the pious, therefore we will not admit him into our presence...In fine, to make a treaty between us and the Pope, is to make a treaty between God and Belial. Nothing will come of it..."
Here's another quote:
Calvin this time--
"Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt... I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy."
Is the Pope the Antichrist?
Here is Martin Luther's answer:
"Since the Pope is a heretic, and idolater, Antichrist, and the red whore reeking with the blood of the pious, therefore we will not admit him into our presence...In fine, to make a treaty between us and the Pope, is to make a treaty between God and Belial. Nothing will come of it..."
Here's another quote:
Calvin this time--
"Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt... I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy."
Croghanite
Puritan Board Sophomore
Where did you find the Calvin quote?
Anton Bruckner
Puritan Board Professor
the Papacy is not the anti Christ because the Papacy does not deny that Jesus came in the flesh as per the definition of Anti Christ found in the epistle of John.
Anton Bruckner
Puritan Board Professor
I follow the argumentation of G.I Williamson.
gene_mingo
Puritan Board Junior
historyb
Puritan Board Junior
Are not there different ones now? The later confessions that come from the earlier ones are not the same anymore, specifically on this issue. I agree with the earlier ones that says the papacy is the anti-Christ.
Presbyterian Deacon
Puritan Board Graduate
Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin
Book IV: Chapter 7, section(25).
And following this -- Calvin does in my opinion show that Paul's words in II Thess. 2 do, and must refer to the Papacy.
I agree with HistoryB.
-----Added 1/11/2009 at 11:38:22 EST-----
I have a question concerning this. Doesn't the RC church deny and pronounce an anathema upon all who believe in justification by faith alone? Is that not denying the Person and work of Christ? They deny the Father and the Son in their denial of election. For if any man or angel bring you another gospel let him be accursed. If the RC's are accursed aren't they denying the Father and the Son?
The spirit of anti-Christ is to deny that Christ came in the flesh. It is a denial of his work. They do deny his work and set themselves up as the Thessalonian s passage speaks.
Davidius
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I think John has in mind something much more directly opposed to the incarnation of Christ, probably proto- (or full blown) gnostic heresies, rather than indirect conclusions drawn from their soteriology. The RCC upholds Nicea and Chalcedon, so this doesn't apply to them.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
