Will You Let God Set You Free!?

“ANTICHRIST PROOFING” YOUR BIBLE STUDY! Getting to the Truth! Who is the Anti-Christ? Anti-Christ [An Historical Figure] is Hidding today in plain sight of the real Church!

38-sword-bible1BEFORE WE GO ON IN OUR STUDIES ABOUT THE BOOK OF REVELATION AND RELATED PROPHETIC INFORMATION,I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT TO UNDO YEARS OF “ANTICHRIST” STUDY PATTERNS THAT THE CHURCH HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN FOR CENTURIES NOW!frustration-large It is very important that we do not study the bible from a “RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVE” which PRESUPPOSES certain ideas that are “ANTICHRIST” in their outcome,taking the SIMPLE BIBLICAL TRUTHS and SUBVERTING them into RITUALIZED TWISTS of themselves. We as HIS BODY must place HIS WORD ABOVE ALL OUR IDEAS AND Church TRADITIONS that are NOT taught DIRECTLY from Scripture. This does not mean that our Churches teachings are wrong only misapplied and over zealously used to usurp the word of God. ( FROM WEBSTERS DICTIONARY The word Tradition means -n. [L. traditio, from trado, to deliver.]

1. Delivery; the act of delivering into the hands of another.

A deed takes effect only from the tradition or delivery.

The sale of a movable is completed by simple tradition.

2. The delivery of opinions,doctrines, practices,rites and customs from father to son, or from ancestors to posterity; the transmission of any opinions or practice from forefathers to descendants by oral communication, without written memorials. Thus children derive their vernacular language chiefly from tradition. Most of our early notions are received by tradition from our parents.

2247994245_0a701b26c6

The Blind lead the blind with Painted on eyes that pretend to see!

Stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught {FROM THE SCRIPTURE NOT FROM MERE MEN}, whether by word or our epistle. 2 Th 2.

Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your traditions? Mat 15. )

I would remind the reader that Traditions in and of themselves are not the problem,it is OUR PLACEMENT OF THEM UPON THE ALTER OF WORSHIP THAT DEALS OUR FAITH THE DEATH BLOW,BECAUSE FAITH CANNOT OPERATE IN THE VACUUM OF EMPTY TRADITIONS! There is NO POWER in traditions because they have no life but the life of the one who passes them on to the next,and if that person does not have God’s life then empty words are all that are passed on. It is with this purpose in mind that I give you these rules of Interpreting Scripture to have a richer Bible study time!

f_commandsmovm_8878d6cRules of Interpretation and

Directions for Investigating the Scriptures

  • First. Let the Bible define and explain its own terms, figures and symbols. Remember that much of the figures and symbols in the Bible are HEBREW IDIOMS,NOT AMERICAN TERMS so get a good book about “Hebrew Idioms”.

    Second.

    Give every passage a literal construction, unless its own connection and phraseology render such a course absurd, by bringing it into collision with truths elsewhere established by positive language. EVEN THOSE PASSAGES THAT ARE SPIRITUAL IN NATURE HAVE A LITERAL MEANING UNDERNEATH WHICH THAT SPIRITUAL TRUTH CONVEYS!

    Third.

    The proper connection of any given passage is not always that with which it stands immediately connected, but those bearing on the same subject found recorded anywhere in the Scriptures. Select all these texts from where they stand, put them together and you will have all the truth revealed on that subject. Get a NAVE’S TOPICAL BIBLE to help you find all the topics on a subject.

    Fourth.

    All passages belonging to any particular subject must contain one or more of the peculiar features of that subject, by which it may be identified as belonging to that subject.

    Fifth.

    The truth in relation to any doctrine must be established by those passages which speak of it in positive and unequivocal language, and those texts belonging to the same subject but which only admit of inferential testimony, no inference should be drawn from them at variance with the truths already established by positive texts.(Scripture DOES NOT CONTRADICT Scripture,ONLY PEOPLE MISINTERPRET AND MISAPPLY it’s principles…..be careful!)

    Sixth.

    No doctrine should be predicated upon mere inference, neither upon one isolated text of Scripture. Any true doctrine will be found interspersed through the whole Bible Such as SALVATION,FAITH,HELL..Not dieing of Loneliness in a Book of Church dogmas somewhere on your bookcase! 5b781

  • The Bible not a Book of Riddles waiting for a certain wise Christian to solve it’s hidden meaning…..that is what Religion that God hates does…it’s not to be guessed out by untaught men, women, and children; though some seem to treat it thus. It was given to be understood correctly; and he who does not thus understand it, should not presume to teach it to others. I do not say that the whole must be perfectly understood, before any part of it can be taught; but I do believe that we should not presume to teach what we do not understand least we all end up here……885f1

    00135Many professed teachers suggest, SOME TIMES strongly that this or that IS the meaning of this or that prophecy, figure, or doctrine, and make these suggestions a foundation for a discourse, essay, or a protracted controversy with another suggestion! The fact is that such persons had better occupy the place of pupils in the school of Christ a little longer, before they attempt to become teachers of the sacred word of God.Always remember that NO MAN or WOMEN has the right to CHANGE Scripture EVER!

    0096I say with much assurance, that every word of the Bible may be correctly understood by studying it under the guidance of the true principles of Biblical interpretation. Let us speak and write in the name of the Lord, what we can prove by the plain and positive testimony he has given, and leave the guessing, suggesting, inferring, and speculating for those to attend to who have turned their ears away from the truth, and are turned unto fables, and will not endure sound doctrine.

    “The words of Yahweh are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times” –Psalms 12:6.

    “So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it” –Isaiah 55:11.

    2Ti 3:16-17 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”

THE ANTICHRIST IS NOT a single person in the future but A SYSTEM OF BELIEF from the past!

ancient-romeThe Roman Empire — Its Rise and Fall

It is understood by all who have followed Daniel’s time that Daniel predicted the rise and fall of the Roman Empire although he does not name it.

The second chapter of Daniel contains the vision of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar, which Daniel interpreted as an outline of future world empires. He said there would be four world empires, beginning with the one which at his time was ruling the earth. The vision says, “History looks like a statue.”

There is basically no disagreement among interpreters, either Catholic or Protestant, on the interpretation of dr0id2statue1the image of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 2. All agree that the image predicts the four world empires: Babylon, the head of gold; Medo-Persia, the chest; Greece, the loins; and Rome represented in the legs and feet.

There is difference of opinion on the meaning of the little stone, described in the prophecy as destroying the whole system when it hits the image in the feet:

2:34 You saw till that a stone was cut out without hands, which struck the image upon his feet [that were] of iron and clay, and broke them to pieces. 2:35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that struck the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.

Daniel interprets the little stone as the Kingdom of God which strikes the image in the feet, and destroys the system represented by the image and itself goes on to fill the whole earth:

2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, [but] it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. 2:45 Forasmuch as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God has made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream [is] certain, and the interpretation thereof is sure.

The positions taken by interpreters is divided among those who believe the little stone is the church, and those who think the event still future. The former see a spiritual kingdom — the church — which later overcame the system of government, based on paganism, started first by Nebuchadnezzar and which system was then received in sequence by the Persians, and then by the Greeks and finally by the Romans. The little stone destroyed the image with some immediacy when it hit the empire in the feet. The location which was struck by the little stone, because of its position down the scale of the legs, would indicate the latter time of the Roman Empire. The toes, on the other hand, would indicate, not the latter times but a time after its division into ten kingdoms. To those seeing the church as the spiritual kingdom, the little stone’s filling of the whole earth is progressive and still going on.

On the other hand are the Futurists who say that the little stone will hit the image in the toes (even though the text does not so state) which to them means: after the Roman Empire was divided, the kingdom of David is to be restored at Jerusalem. Because Jesus did not restore the earthly rule of David’s throne, the Futurists believe that the event was postponed. Thus they see the little stone as the Millennial Kingdom which is yet to come.

One must remember that there is no basic disagreement that the fourth empire refers to the Roman Empire. To which discussion I will return, but first this application:

meimagefourempires2Which View Does the Image Fit?

This divinely inspired figure says, “History will look like a statue.” Visualize with me the statue, and see the correspondence. Ask yourself why did God use the figure of a statue? Should there be some correspondence as to time? In other words should not the statue be proportionate to what it predicts? Certainly so! And so it does.

For the head was barely 69 years (unless you date it from Nebuchadnezzar’s first taking of Babylon, which would add a few more years) before the portion of chest and shoulders allotted to the Medo Persians, came and went, consuming some 214 years, from Cyrus to Alexander. If we date the beginning of the Roman Empire at the Battle of Actium, as many do, then the Greek period of the loins stretches 290 years. From that point the legs, and feet, representing the Roman Empire are 511 years long. That would make the upper torso and head be 504 years long and the rest of the body 511 years long. If you will use those proportions you will find that not only did Daniel predict the coming four empires but gave an accurate prediction of their proportionate rules.

If you used this proportion allowing seven inches for the head, twenty one for the chest, twenty nine from diaphragm to hips, and fifty one from hip joints to feet, you will find that history indeed does match the proportions of a statue. And the church starting in the days of the Roman Empire, with its consequent struggle that saw the old pagan system pass away and Christianity take its place, fits the vision exactly, by the little stone striking the image, chronologically as well as physically in the spot, at or toward the latter times of that Empire, but before it was divided into ten kingdoms.

But what if the image hasn’t been hit in the toes yet. Since there were 511 years from Actium to the fall of Rome, and the fall of Rome should be the time of the appearance of the ten toes, that would make the toes over 1500 years long and still growing! There is obviously something wrong with that interpretation.

To return to the main point. There is no difference of opinion among writers in the Christian community, Catholic, or Protestant, concerning the identity of the fourth empire. In general terms, all agree it is Rome.

The Four Beasts of Daniel 7

The content of the meaning of the vision of the image in chapter 2 is continued here in chapter 7. Here the four empires are pictured as beasts. They are still the same four. And again, even though not named in the text, almost all expositors, agree that the ten-horned fourth beast of this chapter is the Roman Empire. The meaning of the vision is the same but the details are much more amplified. But simply stated, the saints of God will struggle with the fourth beast and in the end will replace it completely. Thus in Daniel:

7:16 I came near to one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things. (17) These great beasts, which are four, [are] four kings, [which] shall arise out of the earth. (18) But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.

The fourth beast is described as having ten horns which are ten kingdoms which shall rise out of it. Among them after they arise another little horn will arise and kill three of them: This little horn will work against the saints of God and over-come them. They are given into his hand until he is judged, then the saints take the kingdom. Thus:

7:7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it [was] diverse from all the beasts that [were] before it; and it had ten horns. (8) I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. (11) I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spoke: I beheld [even] till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame. (12) As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.

[The next corresponds to the little stone of chapter 2.]

7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, [one] like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. (14) And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion [is] an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom [that] which shall not be destroyed.

4beasts[There follows a fuller description of the little horn:]

7:19 Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was different from all the others, exceedingly dreadful, whose teeth [were of] iron, and his nails [of] brass; [which] devoured, broke in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet; (20) And of the ten horns that [were] in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even [of] that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spoke very great things, whose look [was] more stout than his fellows. (21) I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; (22) Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. (23) Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be different from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces. (24) And the ten horns out of this kingdom [are] ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be different from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. (25) And he shall speak [great] words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hands until a time and times and the dividing of a time. (26) But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy [it] to the end. (27) And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom [is] an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him. (28) This [is] the end of the matter.

There is no difference of opinion about the fourth beast. Almost all agree, with rare exception, that it is the Roman Empire. The Roman Catholic Douay version has footnotes that are interesting in this place.

"Chapter 7 ver 3: Four great beasts; The Chaldean, Persian, Grecian, and Roman Empires.” "Ver 7; Ten horns; That is ten kingdoms, (as in Apoc. 17:13) among which the empire of the fourth beast shall be parcelled."

"Ver 8: Another little horn; This is commonly understood of antichrist."

notablehorn1Rome is unmistakable; although Antichrist is not identified, the figure is properly applied. This is pretty fair interpretation, don’t you think? Especially since the Roman interpreters see the ten horns here as representing the same powers in Revelation 17. The same beast is mentioned in Revelation several times. Rome is identified in those places too. The 13th chapter of Revelation has a picture of three entities. The first of these, a beast with seven heads and ten horns is based on the seventh chapter of Daniel. The fourth beast of Daniel and the beast of Revelation 13 are the same, and so agree our Roman Catholic friends. The following is a footnote from chapter 13 from the Roman Catholic version of the Bible.

Rev. 13:1 “The picture of the first beast is based on the seventh chapter of Daniel. This beast is the figure of the kingdoms of this world, kingdoms founded on passion and selfishness, which in every age are antagonistic to Christ and seek to oppress the servants of God. Imperial Rome represents this power.”

It could not be said better. The two-horned beast of chapter 13 is not identified in this version. But further in Rev. 17, there is a picture of a whorish woman who is riding the same beast and in this place the footnote says, “The beast spoken of here seems to be the Roman Empire as in Chapter 13.” Babylon is another figure of the Antichrist. The Antichrist appears under the figure of (1) a little horn in Daniel that rises up out of a fragmented Roman Empire among ten other horns; (2) a beast that looks like Jesus (two horns like a lamb) but speaks like the Devil. This Antichrist beast gives power to a wounded Roman Empire and makes an image to the Roman Empire in Rev. 13. (3) In Rev. 17 Antichrist is represented under the figure of a scarlet colored woman, called a whore and Babylon, who rides the power of the Roman Empire.

Incidently where Babylon is mentioned in Rev 14:8 the Roman Catholic Bible footnote in that place reads: "Babylon: In Jewish and Christian circles, Babylon was a synonym for Rome."

Thus the Roman Empire is clearly seen as being pictured by these figures. The Fourth beast of Daniel and the seven headed ten horned beast of Revelation represents the Roman Empire. We are now a long way toward understanding that chapter. The first beast is the Roman Empire. We will continue our discussion of Revelation 13, after a short discussion on Antichrist.

Antichrist is not a Person

In Daniel 7 the ten horns are taken to be kingdoms amongst whom the Roman Empire would be scattered. Among them would rise a little horn. What is a horn? The ten horns are kingdoms. What is the little horn then? It, too, must be a kingdom, not a person.

antichrist2In Rev 13, Antichrist is pictured as a beast. What are the four beasts of Daniel. They are Empires. The first beast of Revelation 13 is taken by all to be an empire. What therefore is the second beast who looks like Jesus but talks like the devil? That’s right, not a person. If the beasts are empires, then the lamb-like beast is a little empire. Antichrist is thought by some to be a soon coming person. A man who will sit on a throne in Jerusalem. But Rev. 17 gives the picture of Antichrist as a woman dressed in scarlet who rides the power of the Roman Empire. Is Antichrist a woman? She is called "Babylon, mystery, the Mother of harlots." Antichrist is not a woman. The picture of Rev 17 is as the others, of some false religious power which assumes the power of the Roman Empire and claims to have the power of God. Antichrist is not a person. Antichrist is predicted to be a political power rising out of the Roman Empire, and the church as in II Thess. 2, which we will notice later.

Revelation 13:1-10 pictures the Roman Empire as being wounded and fighting against God’s people. From verse 11 – 14 the lamb-like beast is described. In verse 14 he makes an image to the first beast, and uses the image to control the minds and economic areas of men. In verses 17 and 18 he identifies the name of the beast as 666.

This chapter actually does open up if one simply substitutes the name of the Roman Empire for its code name as the first beast. Let’s try the paraphrase of Chapter 13.

Verses 1 – 8 I saw the Roman Empire rise up having seven heads (or the seven forms of governmentwomenonbeast through which it was to pass) and ten horns (or the ten kingdoms into which it was to be divided.) It had the appearance of the Babylonian, Persian and Greek empires that were before it and the Devil gave it its authority. I saw one of its forms of government wounded to death, but its wound was healed; and all the world wondered after the Roman Empire. And they worshipped the Devil who gave power to the Roman Empire, and they said who is like the Roman Empire or is able to make war against it? And the Roman Empire blasphemed and (after it was wounded to death and healed of the wound) it was given power to continue 1260 years. And the Roman Empire blasphemed the name of God and the church and the Christians. Besides having power over all nations and tongues he also made war with the true believers and overcame them. The non-christians worshipped him and they remained unsaved. Verses 9, 10: If you are spiritually inclined listen: Be patient for the coming of the Lord; because human struggles based on selfishness and pride will keep on going on. But the Lord will make it right in the end. Don’t try to set this world’s ills right by warfare or other such human means.

ilittlehornofdaniel7-mediumVerses 11 – 14: I saw another empire rise up from the world system. It looked like Jesus but spoke like the Devil. He exercises all the power of the Roman Empire. This is after the wound of the Roman Empire was healed, and he caused people who live for this world to worship the Roman Empire. He is able to do signs and wonders and miracles in the Roman Empire, with which he deceives people who live for this world.

Verses 14 – 16: After the time of the healing of the wound of the Roman Empire, he says to those who live for this life that they should make a copy (an image) of the Roman Empire. And he empowered the newly living image of the Roman Empire, and caused the image of the Roman Empire to speak and he put to death all who would not obey the power of the image of the Roman Empire. And he caused men in all stations of life to give mental assent and to work for the renewed image of the Roman Empire.

Verses 17 – 18: He made it so no one can be involved in the economy unless he has the mark or the name of the Roman Empire, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom let him who has understanding count the number of the Roman Empire, which is also the number of a single person. And his number is 666.

As the two-horned beast, The Papacy did become an empire in its own right. In the year 800, when Charlemagne came tothumbnail3 Rome the Pope crowned him Emperor of the Romans. The image to the beast could not be a clearer picture of the creation of the Holy Roman Empire. This foundation of feudal society would last for over 1000 years until it was dismantled by Napoleon in 1804. During that 1000 years the Papacy truly wore out the saints of God and prevailed against them. Uncounted numbers of people who were simple believers were put to death because they would not worship the beast nor his image. While masquerading as the Vicar of Christ, this beast, for so a political power is styled in prophecy, waged wars, dominated politics, made kings, dethroned kings, and literally exercised naked arbitrary power over the lives and deaths of many souls throughout the Papal states and the image he made to the Roman Empire called the Holy Roman Empire.

The Image of the Beast

The picture in the 13th chapter of Revelation is one of a pseudo religious-political organization restoring power to the Roman Empire. Historically such events as are pictured did occur. We have noted above the land grants of Pepin and Charlemagne and the usurpation of the Roman senate by the Vatican. At the conclusion of this period, in the year 800 Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne emperor of the Romans. This act produced the image of the Empire called the Holy Roman Empire. It became the political framework which would be handed down for over 1000 years. It would dominate European politics and economy until its dissolution under Napoleon. The actual end of the Holy Roman Empire came, in 1804, ironically in Napoleon’s assumption of the title of Emperor, without the authority of the Pope. The legal dissolution came in 1806 when the hereditary possessor of the title, Frances II of Austria, (who called Napoleon the new Odoacer) abdicated from the office of Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire. This officially ended the entity.

Of this entity, the most well known history was compiled by James Bryce, Fellow, Trinity College, Oxford, first published in 1864, and republished in numberless editions for use in colleges and universities as a standard text. (That is, until our existential age, when the past has no relevance to the moment of existence. Hopefully that nonsense will soon pass). Bryce documents the list and history of the Emperors from Charlemagne to Frances II, all of whom were crowned or confirmed by Papal authority, most in Rome, though they were most often German or French kings. In his introduction to the eighth edition Bryce gives an analysis of the meaning connected with the announcement of the abdication of Frances II in London newspapers, in 1806.

"Of those , in 1806, who read in English newspapers that the Emperor Frances II had announced to the Diet his resignation of the imperial crown, there were probably few who reflected that the oldest political institution in the world had come to an end. Yet it was so. The empire…extinguished, was the same which the crafty nephew of Julius [Caesar] had won for himself against the powers of the East, beneath the cliffs of Actium; and which had preserved almost unaltered, through eighteen centuries of time, and through the greatest changes in extent, in power, in character, a title and pretentions from which all meaning had long since departed. Nothing else so directly linked the old world to the new… From the days of Constantine untill late into the middle ages it was, conjointly with the Papacy, the recognized center and head of Christendom, exercising over the minds of men an influence such as its material strength could never have commanded… Strictly speaking, it is from the year 800 A.D. when a king of the Franks was crowned Emperor of the Romans by Pope Leo III that the beginning of the Holy Roman Empire must be dated."[See: Bryce, James, D.C.L.; The Holy Roman Empire; Pub. David McKay, Philadelphia, eighth edition, 1896. pg. 23.]

Bryce continues, noting that there is nothing isolated in history, and the Holy Roman Empire harks back to the Empire before its fall. As he has stated above, the power that dissolved in 1806 is that which was begun by Augustus in 35 B.C. at Actium. The history of the power of a wounded and seemingly dead Roman Empire being assumed and arrogated to the Papal system, and the Papal system in the name of Rome creating an image to that first political system, called the Holy Roman Empire, is so clearly outlined in history, and then is so clearly outlined in Revelation the thirteenth chapter as to give no room for other application.

It seems strange to me that evangelical Christians have abandoned leaders who have for many centuries outlined these prophecies in more detail and greater precision than I do here. That they would cast away their prophetic heritage for the fantasies that are currently being harked in the name of prophetic fulfillment is frustrating and shocking! Why, when they are so clearly fulfilled, does anyone look for a future fulfillment? Antichrist has long since come. His reign of 1260 years is long since over. He has suffered most of the blows aimed to bring him from his place of arbitrary control of the physical and spiritual lives of men. He has but little time left.

The Darkest Period of the Papacy

badpopesThe Bad Popes is a 1986 book by E. R. Chamberlin documenting the lives of eight of the most controversial popes (papal years in parentheses):

Adrian II, John VIII, Marinus, 867-884. These popes begin the darkest period of the papacy. 870-1050, called by historians the midnight of the dark Ages. Bribery, corruption, immorality, and bloodshed, make it the darkest period in the church’s history. Sergius III, 904-911 A.D., had a mistress, Marosia. She and her mother Theodora, and her sister, filled the papal chair with their paramours and bastard sons, and turned the papal palace into a den of robbers. This is known in history as the Pornocracy or Rule of Harlots

. John X, 914-928, was brought from Ravenna to Rome and made pope by Theodora (who had also other paramours) for the more convenient gratification of her passions. He was smothered to death by Marosia, who then raised to the papacy her creatures.

Leo VI, 928-9, Stephen VII 929-31, John XI 931 – 936 her own illegitimate son. Another of her sons appointed the four next popes.

John XII, 955-963: a grandson of Morosia was guilty of almost every crime; violated virgins and widows, lived with his father’s mistress; made the papal palace a brothel; was killed in the act of adultery by the woman’s enraged husband.

The Depths of Papal Degradation

The next six popes, 963-984: (Average 3 1/2 years per pope).

Boniface VII, 984-985, murdered pope John XIV, and maintained himself on the bloodstained Papal throne by distribution of stolen money. The bishop of Orleans referring to Boniface VII and his immediate predecessors called them “monsters of guilt reeking in blood and filth; Antichrist sitting in the Temple of God.”

Benedict VIII, 1012-1024, bought the office of pope with open bribery or Simony as it was called — after Simon the sorcerer.

John XIX, 1024-1033, bought the papacy; he passed through all the clerical degrees in one day.

Benedict IX, 1033-1045, was made pope as a boy of twelve with money and a powerful family. Surpassed John XII in wickedness; committed murders and adulteries in broad daylight; robbed pilgrims on the graves of martyrs; a hideous criminal, the people drove him out of Rome.

Gregory VI, 1045-1046, had two rival popes: Benedict IX, and Sylvester III. Rome swarmed with hired assassins; the virtue of pilgrims was violated; the churches desecrated with bloodshed.

Clement II, 1046-1047, was appointed pope by Holy Roman Emperor, Henry III because no Roman clergyman could be found who was free from bribery and fornication.

Damascus II, 1048: protests at the continued filth, called for reform and found a leader in the following pope:

Hildebrand or Gregory VII, 1073-1085: although moral reforms were effected, the consolidation of power under Hildebrand was so strong that the next two hundred years are marked by a new evil — that of going to war by papal armies. Armed force maintained several of the popes. Many of the next popes would be driven into exile by armies when they found their own forces overcome! In the previous period one would be justified in calling the Papacy a “whore.” In this period, 1073 and the next 200 years, the most evident characteristics of the two horned beast using the image of the beast are so evident as to be unmistakable.

Following that period, the Inquisition would follow as the Papal instrument of political power and many poor souls of simple believers would die under this inhuman instrument of the "vicar of Christ."[Halley, Henry H.; Pocket Bible Handbook Pub. by Halley, Chicago, eighteenth edition, 1948. Above is a condensation of material found on pgs. 683-685.]

This same history of moral and political corruption is more briefly but accurately recorded by Butler, another Roman author, who wrote an account of the Vatican Council 1869 – 1870. This book has an Imprimateur and a Nihil Obstat which means that Roman authorities had declared the book has no doctrinal errors. He says:

"In 1044 the condition of the Papacy had become so scandalous that the emperor Henry III intervened…[to lift the Papacy] out of its state of prostration and degradation in which it had lain for well nigh two hundred years." [Butler, Dom Cuthbert; The Vatican Council 1869 - 1870; Newman Press, Maryland, 1962. pg. 12.]

Butler also gives the history of the Donation of Constantine, a fraudulent set of decrees which were knowing used by the Papacy to justify holding temporal power. Butler says:

“it was believed that the first Christian emperor had, in the plenitude of his power, handed over to the Pope…the power to rule over Italy, the Islands, and in a vague way all the West. It was on the strength of the Donation that the Popes gave authority for the Norman invasions of England and of Ireland, and many similar assignments of territory.” [Ibid. pg. 17.]

It gives me no pleasure to have to call these events from the past. But the Papal system has not repented, nor will it. There are still the same stains of blood, money manipulation, alleged assassinations, and political intrigue which causes the sufferings of countless victims, done in the name of Christ and no amount of false apologies will heal her whoredoms. Yes, it is historically right to call the Papal system a whore. Yes, it is historically correct to see the Papal system as a political power that looks like Jesus and talks like the devil. At least one Papal insider sees the same thing.

The number 666 obviously refers to the name “Roman.” The text says so. It is the name of the beast, the roman system from which the papacy rose.

13:17 And that no man might buy or sell except he who had the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

The number 666 not only does but it ought to refer to the name Roman. The reason arises from the incredible prophecies of Daniel where he predicts four world empires and proceeds to name three of them. In Daniel 2, Nebuchadnezzar’s empire begins the new world order of one nation ruling all the other civilized nations around the Mediterranean. The next three are described but not named here. The first is named: the Babylonian empire. It is the head of Gold.

2:37 You, O king, [are] a king of kings: for the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. 2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven has he given into your hand, and has made you ruler over them all. You [are] this head of gold. 2:39 And after you shall arise another kingdom inferior to you, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth. 2:40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron:

In the eighth chapter, Daniel describes in a vision the incredibly accurate occurrence of the Medo-Persian struggle with the rise of the Greeks. The first kingdom of the Greek empire defeats the Medo-Persians inside their own territory and then in the height of power the first kingdom is broken and divided into four horns or kingdoms. The incredible part is that Daniel not only gives this precise outline years before 325 B.C. when the events happened, but he also names the participants by name, before they had risen to power!

8:20 The ram which thou sawest having [two] horns [are] the kings of Media and Persia. 8:21 And the rough goat [is] the king of Grecia: and the great horn that [is] between his eyes [is] the first king.

Thus are the first three empires of the four named by name in the Bible.

The fourth beast is described in Daniel 2, and 7, in much greater detail than these here named. Certainly, if God inspired Daniel to name 1. Babylon; 2. Medo-Persia; 3. Greece; 4. ?, He could have named the fourth beast. The fourth beast ought to be named. He is described in greater length in the book of Revelation where he, again, is not named. Why?

4thbeastThere is good reason why the fourth beast is named in a code in Revelation. The number 666 is the number of the name of the fourth beast. The text says so — no matter the many voices who see some mysterious person arising during the last seven years of the world’s history, who will have the number. The number is clearly stated to be the name of the fourth beast. So 666 ought to be the name Roman. Significantly the text rules out the name being Rome, it must be Roman, because it is the name of a single person as well as the name of the beast. Rome is a place. Roman is the name of both the empire, the beast, and a citizen, a single person, who is also a Roman.

We now use the Arabic number system with numerals 1 through 9 and then adding a zero, invented by the Arabs in the eighth century. Previous to that time numbers were attributed to each letter of the alphabet. A = 1, B = 2, C = 3, … J = 10 then K would not be 11 but 20 and L = 30 etc. Continuing, R would be 90, S would be 100, T = 200 and so on. Any name therefore would have a numerical value. Both Hebrew and Greek alphabets used this system. [See Appendix D.]

It is well known, and has been for centuries, that the name Roman in both Greek and incredibly also in Hebrew has the number we are looking for. It ought to have it. The number is the name of the beast, and the name of the beast is Roman. Every Historical interpreter with few exceptions, from Irenaeus forward, has recorded this fact. In the old world Tertullian, and Hippolytus did. Isaac Newton, the scientist, did in the 17th century; Robert Fleming at the turn of the 17th century; Bishop Newton in the 18th century; Faber, Barnes, Elliott, Cunningham, Johnson, and a host of others from almost every denomination of Protestantism in the 19th century.

But why is the beast named in a mystery code? Answer: The Roman Empire fulfilled the prophecies concerning its persecution of the woman, (Rev. 12), and, “make war with the saints and overcome them,” (Rev.13:7). The Roman Empire waged ten official persecutions against the church for almost 300 years. These were legally sanctioned by the senate and carried out under the Roman legal system. The Christians were tortured, whipped, burned, torn apart, beheaded, thrown to lions, and crucified by official Roman authority according to law, for three centuries. Pastors were killed, Bibles confiscated and burned, church buildings destroyed, and the flocks scattered.

How much worse might the Roman persecutors have been if they found their nation named by name as a beast in the Holy writings of those they persecuted? The conditions were bad enough without adding more fuel to the fire. So God couched the name in a mystery. He called the fourth beast 666, so no one could know it except the mind that has wisdom. The first three beasts of Daniel are named by name in the Bible. The fourth beast of Daniel ought to be named in the Bible. He is; his (It would would be more accurate to refer to the beast as It; or She since in Greek, the word beast is a neuter gender noun, while in Hebrew the word beast is a femine gender noun) name is 666. Did the early Christians so understand it? They should have. They read the book of Daniel and could count and know that Rome was the fourth Empire to come on the earth. They could see in Daniel that it would pass away by being divided into ten kingdoms and Antichrist would rise among the ten kingdoms of a divided Roman Empire. Early Christian Writers

Would it not be interesting to know what early Christians thought about these passages? Writers whose lives overlap the lives of apostles are called Apostolic Fathers. Their writings are fragmentary and few have been preserved. Christian writers who were born after the death of the apostles but before 325 A.D. are called Ante-Nicene Fathers. They wrote before the council of Nicea which marked the triumph of the Christian religion in the empire. Ancient writers who lived after the council of Nicea are called Post-Nicene Fathers. There are many writings which have survived and been preserved from these times.

Irenaeus

Would it not be interesting to see what someone thought about these passages hardly fifty years after they were written, and before they were fulfilled? It is easier to interpret prophecy after its fulfillment. Let us see how Irenaeus did before the fulfillment. We can sympathize with him if he doesn’t get it completely right due to not being able to parallel the prophecy with the events of history. But the incredible thing is that the "fathers" knew the general outline of future events. They, therefore, were not in ignorance, that that day would overtake them as a thief.

(I Thess 5:4) But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.

Why were they not in darkness? Because they knew that as long as the Roman Empire had not fallen the second coming was not imminent.

Irenaeus was born about 135 and lived into the next century. He wrote a commentary on portions of Daniel and Revelation, especially of the thirteenth chapter and the seventh chapter of Daniel. The epitome of the chapter (XX1) on the Antichrist in his writings begins:

"John and Daniel have predicted the dissolution and desolation of the Roman Empire, which shall precede the end of the world,…" [See Schaff, Philip, editor; Ante-Nicene Fathers, Pub. Erdmans, Grand Rapids. 1971 The Ante-Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers are considered in the same way as the classical writers. The have been published numberless times. Erdmans has published a multi-volume set well edited. Irenaeus; Against Heresies XXVI,1]

Irenaeus had no difficulty in interpreting Daniel: "concerning the ten kings who shall then arise, among whom the empire that now rules the earth shall be partitioned."[Irenaeus, ibid.] He believed the Roman Empire would pass away and be divided into ten kingdoms, and so it did happen in his future. There was no way for him to know that except through the prophecies. The opinion of those living in the empire was that it would last forever — they called it "eternal Rome." But seeing that John and Daniel had predicted the decline and dissolution of the empire into ten kingdoms is not all that Irenaeus saw. He said, "It is manifest that he that shall come," he means the little horn, "shall slay three" of the 10 horns, "and subject the remainder to his power." He believed that the coming entity would overcome three and then dominate the other seven states left to a divided Roman Empire.

He calls the power that would rise in the place of the Roman Empire an "apostasy," and warns that God, "has prepared eternal fire for every kind of apostasy." In quoting Justin Martyr, who lived before Irenaeus, he considers that Satan is the author of "apostasy" and eternal fire is "reserved for all apostasy." This is a remarkable passage in that Irenaeus foresees the division of the Roman Empire as yet to come and sees the Antichrist power rising out of the church, for that is the meaning of apostasy. It refers to an enemy, not from without but one who rises up from within.

A few paragraphs further Irenaeus makes the first known attempt to interpret the number 666. Remember that this is only a short time after Revelation was written. It was also at the time that the Roman Empire was at its zenith — the most peaceful, successful time of the empire. It is the period of the Five Good Emperors or the Pax Romana, when there was no war within the empire and no unsuccessful military action outside the empire for a hundred years.

Irenaeus reminds us that since 666 — the name — has not been fulfilled as yet in a coming power, (which he, as most others of the period, thought to be a single man), then it is wise to be cautious in looking around for the right name. These interpreters living before the fall of the Roman empire did not see the anti-christian power that would rise up and persecute true believers for centuries — they understood everything else but the time frame. But they did know that he would rise up in a shattered Roman Empire. They did not have the hindsight we have to see that an anti-christian kingdom did rise up out of the Christian religion and seize the authority of God and man; and with the falsely assumed authority of God and the sword of man, attempt to dominate, and actually dominate, European and world politics for almost 1300 years. [ibid.]

But he makes some startling observations on the number:

"It is not for the want of names that contain the number that I say this, …for there are many names that can be found that have the number… for the name Evanthas contains the required number" [Then this remarkable statement,] "Then also Lateinos has the number 666 and it is a very probable solution, this being the name of the last kingdom [of the four seen by Daniel]. For the Latins are they who at present bear rule. I will not, however, make any boast over this [coincidence]."

This comment was made barely before the ink was dry on the book of Revelation, and although it is made with caution, those who followed used more boldness in the application of the name. But Irenaeus knew certain things. He knew that the Roman Empire had to fall and that an Antichrist would arise in its ruins and that the second coming of Christ would be after that. And He was right! Tertullian

Tertullian was a Christian living in Carthage, born after Irenaeus, about the year 150. He carries the interpretation forward. In his essay, On The Resurrection of the Flesh, he speaks of the coming Antichrist and quotes from the second Thessalonian letter. He says:

That day shall not come, unless, indeed, there come a falling away, he means indeed of this present empire…and he who now hinders must hinder, until he be taken our ot the way. What obstacle is there but the Roman state, the falling away of which, by being scattered into ten kingdoms shall introduce Antichrist upon its ruins?" [Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, chap. XXIV.]

Here the prophecy of Daniel and the Thessalonian passage are put together to predict the future. Tertullian could not have believed in the imminent return of Christ. He, like Irenaeus, would have said the Roman empire has to fall first and be divided. An Antichrist will come but not before the fall of the Roman empire and Christ will come after that. He not only had a correct view of the future from his time, but he was able to give the obviously true meaning of a passage of scripture over which most still stumble. Hippolytus

Hippolytus wrote about the year 200. He is thought, by some, to be in the line of Roman bishops which the Catholic church would claim reaches back to Peter. If he was, he did not know that made him the POPE. His writings give no implication that he would think of himself as a super bishop much less the Supreme Pontiff! In fact he takes for granted that all the church understood that Lateinos is the name of the beast.

"The wound of the first beast was healed and he (the second beast) was to make the image speak, that is to say to become powerful; and it is manifest to all, that those who at present still hold power are Latins. If then we take the name as the name of a single man it becomes Latinus. Wherefore we ought neither to give it out as if this were certainly his name, nor again ignore the fact that he may not be otherwise designated." [Hippolytus, Treatise on Christ and Antichrist (50) pg. 215.]

Hippolytus is convinced that the name of the beast is Latin and that the word Latinus, or Latin man, has the number 666. He then makes some faltering attempts to name the three kingdoms to be taken over by Antichrist. Since they are in the future to him he has little success. But Rome has been identified, and he living in Rome at the time knows it is to fall. He continues:

“These things shall then be in the future, beloved, and when the three horns are cut off he will begin to show himself as God.” [ ibid.]

Hippolytus has a composite of Daniel and Revelation in his fulfillment. He has had to put together the fourth beast of Daniel and the little horn with the beasts of Revelation 13 and 17 as well as the image to the beast to make this interpretation. Out of that he has properly identified Rome as the beast and has the name 666 identified with the Romans because, "they still, at present, bear rule." In other words they are the fourth empire from the Babylonians as per Daniel’s prophecy. I am impressed. Scolia

Between the years 250 to 300 some unnamed person wrote comments called scolia in the margin of the writings of Hippolytus. They are really good and there is a detailed exposition of Daniel 7, where each of the beasts are analyzed and interpreted. He says, Babylon, of course, is the first, the bear is Persia, the leopard is Greece and the four heads of the leopard are the fourfold division of Alexander’s kingdom. He names each of the principalities. He makes a very accurate historical interpretation of Daniel’s prophecy. The scolia then go on to the fourth beast:

“…a fourth beast. Now that there has arisen no other kingdom after that of the Greeks except that which stands sovereign at present, is manifest to all….for there is no other kingdom [bearing rule over all the earth] remaining after this one, but from it will spring 10 horns. "And it had ten horns, for as the prophecy of the leopard with four heads…was fulfilled, and Alexander’s kingdom was divided into four principalities, so also now, we ought to look for the ten horns which are to spring up from [the fourth beast] when the time of the beast shall be fulfilled, and the little horn, which is Antichrist shall appear suddenly in their midst."[Hippolytus, Fragments from the Commentaries, Scolia 6-9, pg. 189.]

In reading the prophecies, the author of the scolia has concluded that the four world empires spoken of by Daniel will end with the Romans. He concludes that the imperial system will then end! (This is a very clever and accurate deduction for someone who has not the advantage of hindsight.) He says there will be no further united empire after this one! What incredibly accurate insight which gave him a view of the future that we know was correct. (Notice with the lengthening of the time since the giving of the prophecy the fulfillment is no longer expected to be sudden.) That is, the sudden appearance of Antichrist is now seen to take place after the empire is divided for some space of time. The same unfolding of events, rather than instant fulfillment, is surmised in Hippolytus above, i.e. "he shall begin to show." The scolia goes on to suggest patience and prayer, that we might avoid these things which he is convinced will come. If we have the date of this scolia correct, it is ironic that the author is living contemporaneously with, or just slightly before, the severest persecution the church would ever suffer, yet he shows great concern for the time of the little horn.

“So we ought not to anticipate the counsel of God, but exercise patience and prayer that we fall not on such times. We should not, however, refuse to believe that these things will come to pass. For if the things which the prophet predicted in former times have not been realized, then we need not look for these things. But if those former things did happen in their proper seasons, as was foretold, then these things also shall certainly be fulfilled.” ibid.

St. John Chrysostom Chrysostom’s name means “golden mouth.” He must have been a great orator. Chrysostom moves us ahead a little less than 100 years. He died in 408 A.D. This would place his death just two years before the first sack of Rome, which historical interpreters apply to the first trumpet, being the first of the four invasions and sacks of Rome which would bring the Roman empire to its end, in the year 476. The fall of Rome therefore, which all these interpreters have been looking for, is now just imminent to Chrysostom.

Jerome

He, as those preceding, sees the fall of Rome as necessary to the coming of the Antichrist. The events of his later life would have anticipated the event of the fall, and those living just a few years longer, would have seen the fall of the Roman Empire. Of II Thess. he says:

"that antichrist shall sit in the temple of God, either at Jerusalem (as some imagine) or in the church (as we more truly judge) showing himself that he is Christ, and the son of God: and unless the Roman Empire be first desolated, and antichrist precede, Christ shall not come." [Newton, Thomas; Dissertations on the Prophecies; in two volumes, tenth edition, London 1804; Vol. II, pgs. 115, 116.]

There are others who came to the same conclusions about the fall of the Roman Empire and its division into ten kingdoms based on the seventh chapter of Daniel. We have not quoted them but it might be noted that Justyn Martyr, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Lactantius, Ambrose, Austin, and others, left writings with similar views, i.e. the Roman Empire will be dissolved into ten kingdoms, and Antichrist will arise among them preceding the second coming of Christ. None of these Christians were in ignorance that that day would over take them as a thief. They knew the second coming of Christ was not imminent in their lifetime. Only those like Jerome, in the latter time of the empire, thought the time was near, because the fall of the empire was near. Just as Chrysostom, others knew the Roman Empire would fall and on its ruins “out of the church of Christ,” one would rise who would feign himself to be Christ, and “seize the power of God and man.” What power was it that actually did step into the vacuum of power left by fallen Rome and with the name Roman sit in the church, seize the authority of God and man, then arrogate three states to itself, and dominate the other seven, for hundreds of years? Does the reader need a clearer picture of the past to name the Antichrist? These brethren of the past gave us this clear picture before it happened!

wittenberg-door22 John 1:7-11 (KJV) 7″ For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. 9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. 10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: 11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds. ” I BELIEVE ANTICHRIST TO BE BOTH A RELIGIOUS SYSTEM AND A PERSON (THAT IS WHOEVER RESIDES AS POPE) THIS IS THE STAND OF ALL THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS UP UNTIL THE “JESUIT’S” REINTERPRETED THE PROPHEIES OF THE END TIMES!

Can Catholics and Protestants Walk Together?
A Former Catholic says NO!

Issue Date: September/October 1995

By Rick Jones

The headline on the front cover of the July, 1995 Charisma magazine read, “Catholics and Protestants, Can We Walk Together?”

Several articles inside suggest that, yes, we can. But the Bible reveals many reasons why true Christians have never, and will never, be able to walk together with Roman Catholics as brethren, because they are just not saved in the first place.thumbnail3

A primary reason is the Roman Catholic doctrine which declares all non-Catholics to be hell-bound sinners. No, you will never hear these words from the Catholic Public Relations people. On the contrary, they will quickly deny it, labeling the accuser as a divisive troublemaker. However, the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church, the official source of Roman Catholic doctrine, proclaims:

“For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained.” Pg. 215, #816 (emphasis added)

Could the Catholic position be any plainer? The fact that many Catholics aren’t aware of this doctrine changes nothing. I remember a recent phone conversation with a rather knowledgeable Catholic lady. When I mentioned this Catholic doctrine, she screeched: “The Catholic church doesn’t believe that anymore!” But they do. The most current Catechism reassures us that:

“…all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body: Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: …Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.” Pg. 224, #846 (emphasis added) thumbnail111

This is not a new Catholic doctrine. Previous catechisms have taught the same. Here is a quote from the 1949 Baltimore Catechism:

Question: “Are all obliged to belong to the Catholic Church in order to be saved?” Answer: “All are obliged to belong to the Catholic Church to be saved.” (New Baltimore Catechism, No. 3, Pg. 93, #166)

Rest assured, the Catholic church does NOT want you reading quotes like these. The last document they want you investigating is the official source of Catholic doctrine, the Catechism.

They would rather have you learn Catholic doctrine from their professionally trained representatives who are appearing on Christian TV and Christian radio. They hope your opinions about Catholicism will be derived from propaganda pieces like the one in the July, 1995 Charisma magazine.

Salvation through the Catholic church is but one of a host of doctrines that will forever divide true Protestants from Roman Catholics. Other Protestants may disagree, but I could never walk together with a church that publicly acknowledges me as a brother in Christ, but whose official doctrine condemns me as a lost sinner.

I could not walk together with a church that contends that faith in a church is necessary for salvation when the Bible declares that salvation is a free gift of God through Jesus Christ alone. (See Rom. 6:23, Acts 4:12.)

I could never walk together with a church that would ask me to deny the words of Jesus Christ in John 6:47: “He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.”

Can Protestants walk together with Roman Catholics as bretheren? Only if the Protestants are willing to forsake the cardinal doctrines of their faith and deny the Holy Scriptures.

Charles Spurgeon
on
Roman Catholicism

“Cursed be the man before the Lord, that riseth up and buildeth this city Jericho.” Joshua 6:26

“Since he was cursed who rebuilt Jericho, much more the man who labours to restore Popery among us. In our fathers’ days the gigantic walls of Popery fell by the power of their faith, the perseverance of their efforts, and the blast of their gospel trumpets; and now there are some who would rebuild that accursed system upon its old foundations. O Lord, be pleased to thwart their unrighteous endeavours, and pull down every stone which they build. It should be a serious business with us to be thoroughly purged of every error which may have a tendency to foster the spirit of Popery, and when we have made a clean sweep at home we should seek in every way to oppose its all too rapid spread abroad in the church and in the world. This last can be done in secret by fervent prayer, and in public by decided testimony. We must warn with judicious boldness those who are inclined towards the errors of Rome; we must instruct the young in gospel truth, and tell them of the black doings of Popery in the olden times. We must aid in spreading the light more thoroughly through the land, for priests, like owls, hate daylight. Are we doing all we can for Jesus and the gospel? If not, our negligence plays into the hands of priestcraft. What are we doing to spread the Bible, which is the Pope’s bane and poison? Are we casting abroad good, sound gospel writings? Luther once said, ‘The devil hates goose quills,’ and doubtless, he has good reason, for ready writers, by the Holy Spirit’s blessing, have done his kingdom much damage. If the thousands who will read this short word this night will do all they can to hinder the rebuilding of his accursed Jericho, the Lord’s glory shall speed among the sons of men. Reader, what can you do? What will you do?” From “Evening By Evening” by Charles Spurgeon
The Church (so called) of Rome has no right to rankth_roadtohelleasytotravel amongst Christian Churches. She is not a Church, neither is her religion the Christian religion. We are accustomed to speak of Popery as a corrupt form of Christianity. We concede too much. The Church of Rome bears the same relation to the Church of Christ which the hierarchy of Baal bore to the institute of Moses; and Popery stands related to Christianity only in the same way in which Paganism stood related to primeval Revelation. Popery is not a corruption simply, but a transformation. It may be difficult to fix the time when it passed from the one into the other; but the change is incontestible. Popery is the gospel transubstantiated into the flesh and blood of Paganism, under a few of the accidents of Christianity.

The Worship of the Virgin Mary:Another God?thumbnail5

There seems to be on the part of fallen man an inherent sense of his need of a man-God. The patriarch of Uz gave expression to this feeling, when he intimated his wish for a “days-man,” who “might lay his hand upon us both.” Our intellectual facilities and our moral affections are unable to traverse the mighty void between ourselves and the Infinite, and both unite in seeking a resting-place midway in One combining in himself both natures. The spirituality of God places Him beyond our grasp, and removes Him, in a manner, from the sphere of our sympathy. We are dazzled by his majesty and glory; his holiness overawes us; his greatness, seen from afar, and incomprehensible by us, seems to repel rather than invite confidence, and to chill the heart rather than expand it into love. “Is there no resting-place for our affections and sympathies,” we instinctively ask, “nearer than the august throne of the Infinite?” We need to have the divine attributes reduced to a scale, so to speak, which corresponds more nearly with our intellectual and moral range, and exhibited in One who to the nature of God adds that of man. This feeling has received numerous and varied manifestations; and the effort to meet it has formed a prominent feature in every one of the great systems of idolatry which have arisen in the earth. The nations of antiquity had their race of demi-gods or deified men. In the modern idolatries it has operated not less powerfully. The Mahommedans have their PROPHET, and the Roman Catholics have their VIRGIN. “Here,” says Popery, “is a being who may be expected to be more indulgent to your failings than Deity can be,–who will be more easily moved to answer your prayers,–and whom you may approach without any overwhelming awe;” and thus the false is substituted for the true Mediator. It is in the religion of the Bible alone that this instinct of our nature has received its full gratification. The wish breathed of old by the patriarch, and expressed with singular emphasis in all the idolatries that successively arose on the earth, is adequately met only in the “mystery of godliness,–God manifest in the flesh.” But what we are here to speak of is the abuse of this principle, in the idolatrous worship of the Virgin.

Papists may make a shift to prove that it is a mitigated worship which they offer to the saints,–that they allow them no rank but that of mediators, and no function but that of intercession,–though even this worship, both in its principles and in its forms, the Bible denominates idolatry. But the worship of the Virgin is capable of no such defence;–it is direct, undisguised, rank idolatry. Roman Catholics give the same titles, perform the same acts, and ascribe the same powers, to Mary as to Christ; and in doing so they make her equal with God.thumbnail4

To Mary are given names and titles which can be lawfully given to no one but God. She is styled “Mother of God;” “Queen of Seraphim, of Saints, and of Prophets;” “Advocate of Sinners;” “Refuge of Sinners;” “Gate of Heaven;” “Morning Star;” “Queen of Heaven.” In Roman Catholic countries she is commonly addressed as the “Most Holy Mary.” She is often styled the “Most Faithful,” and the “Most Merciful.” In what other terms could Christ himself be addressed? The Papist alleges that he still regards her as but a creature; nevertheless he addresses her in terms which imply that she possesses divine perfections, power, and glory. The whole psalter of David has been transformed by Bonaventura to the invocation of Mary, by erasing the name of Jehovah, and substituting that of the Virgin. We give an example of the work:–”In thee, O Lady, have I put my trust: let me never be ashamed: in thy grace uphold me.” “Unto thee have I cried, O Mary, when my heart was in heaviness; and thou hast heard me from the top of the everlasting hills.” “Come unto Mary, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and she shall refresh your souls.” This is nothing but pure BLASPHEMY!

In the second place, the same worship is rendered to Mary as to Christ. thumbnail2Churches are built to her honour; her shrines are crowded with devotees, enriched with their gifts, and adorned with their votive offerings. To her prayers are offered as to a divine being, and blessings are asked as from one who has power to bestow them. Her votaries are taught to pray, “Spare us, good Lady,” and “From all evil, good Lady, deliver us.”1 Five annual festivals celebrate her greatness, and keep alive the devotion of her worshippers. In Roman Catholic countries the dawn is ushered in with hymns to her honour; her praises are again chanted at noon; and the day is closed with an Ave Maria sung to the lady of heaven. Her name is the first which the infant is taught to lisp; and the dying are directed to entrust their departing spirits into the hands of the Virgin. In health and in sickness, in business and in pleasure, at home or abroad, the Virgin is ever first in the thoughts, the affections, and the devotions of the Roman Catholic. The soldier fights under her banner, and the bandit plunders under her protection.2 Her deliverances are commemorated by public monuments erected to her by cities and provinces. In 1832, the cholera desolated the country around Lyons, but did not enter the city. A pillar, erected in the suburbs, commemorates the event, and ascribes it to the interposition of the Virgin. When the pontiffs would bless with special emphasis, it is in the name of Mary; and when they threaten most terribly, it is her vengeance which they denounce against their enemies.3 In short, the Roman Catholic is taught that none are so miserable but she can succour them, none so criminal but she will pardon them, and none so polluted but she can cleanse them.

There is scarce an act which it is lawful to perform towards God which the Roman Catholic is not taught to perform towards the Virgin. One of the most solemn acts of worship a creature can perform is to give himself in covenant to God,–to make over himself to Jehovah,–for time and for eternity. The Papist is taught to make this solemn surrender of himself to the Virgin. “Entering into a solemn covenant with holy Mary, to be for ever her servant, client, and devotee, under some special rule, society, or form of life, and thereby dedicating our persons, concerns, actions, and all the moments and events of our life, to Jesus, under the protection of his divine mother; choosing her to be our adoptive mother, patroness, and advocate; and entrusting her with what we are, have, do, or hope, in life, death, or through eternity.”4 Some of the most sublime and devotional passages of the Bible are applied to the Virgin Mary. From the work quoted above we may give the following illustrations, in which a strain of mingled prayer and praise suitable to be offered only to God, is addressed to the Virgin:5

“Vers. Open my lips, O mother of Jesus.
Resp. And my soul shall speak forth thy praise.
Vers. Divine lady, be intent to my aid.
Resp. Graciously make haste to help me.
Vers. Glory be to Jesus and Mary.
Resp. As it was, is, and ever shall be.”

To the Virgin Mary is likewise applied the eighth Psalm thus:–

“Mary, mother of Jesus, how wonderful is thy name, even unto the ends of the earth!
“All magnificence be given to Mary; and let her be exalted above the stars and angels.
“Reign on high as queen of seraphims and saints; and be then crowned with honour and glory,” &c.
“Glory be to Jesus and Mary,” &c.

It is true, the theologians of the Church of Rome profess to distinguish between the worship offered to Mary and the worship offered to Christ. The saints are to be worshipped with dulia, the Virgin with hyperdulia, and God with latria.6 But this is a distinction which has never yet been clearly defined: in practice it is utterly disregarded; it seems to have been invented solely to meet the Protestant charge of idolatry; and the mass of the common people are incapable of either understanding it or acting upon it. We not unfrequently find them praying in the very same words to God, to the Virgin, and to the saints. We may instance the well-known prayer to which, in 1817, an indulgence of three hundred days was annexed. It is as follows:–

“Jesus, Joseph, Mary, I give you my heart and soul;
Jesus, Joseph, Mary, assist me in my last agony;
Jesus, Joseph, Mary, I breathe my soul to you in peace.”

According to the theory of lower and higher degrees of worship, three kinds of worship ought to have been here employed,–latria for God, hyperdulia for Mary, and dulia for Joseph; but all three, without the least distinction, or the smallest alteration in the words or in the form, are worshipped alike.

In the third place, the same works are ascribed to Mary as to Christ. She hears prayer, intercedes with God for sinners,th_1385 guides, defends, and blesses them in life, succours them when dying, and receives their departing spirits into paradise. But passing over these things, the great work of Redemption, the peculiar glory of the Saviour, and the chief of God’s ways, is now by Roman Catholics, plainly and without reserve, applied to Mary. The Father who devised, the Son who purchased, and the Spirit who applies, the salvation of the sinner, must all give place to the Virgin. It was her coming which prophets announced;7 it is her victory which the Church celebrates. Angels and the redeemed of heaven ascribe unto her the glory and honour of saving men. She rose from the dead on the third day; she ascended to heaven; she has been re-united to her Son; and she now shares with Him power, glory, and dominion. “The eternal gates of heaven rolled back; the king’s mother entered, and was conducted to the steps of his royal throne. Upon it sat her Son. . . . . ‘A throne was set for the king’s mother, and she sat upon his right hand.’ And upon her brow he placed the crown of universal dominion; and the countless multitude of the heavenly hosts saluted her as the queen of heaven and earth.”8 All this Romanists ascribe to a poor fallen creature, whose bones have been mouldering in the dust for eighteen hundred years. We impute nothing to the Church of Rome, in this respect, which her living theologians do not teach. Instead of being ashamed of their Mariolatry, they glory in it, and boast that their Church is becoming every day more devoted to the service and adoration of the Virgin. The argument by which the work of redemption is ascribed to Mary we find briefly stated by Father Ventura, in a conversation with M. Roussel of Paris, then travelling in Italy.

“The Bible tells us but a few words about her” [the Virgin Mary], said M. Roussel to the Padre, “and those few words are not of a character to exalt her.”

“Yes,” replied Father Ventura, “but those few words express every thing! Admire this allusion: Christ on the cross addressed his mother as woman; God in Eden declared that the woman should crush the serpent’s head; the woman designated in Genesis must therefore be the woman pointed out by Jesus Christ; and it is she who is the Church, in which the family of man is to be saved.”

“But that is a mere agreement of words, and not of things,” responded the Protestant minister.

“That is sufficient,” said Father Ventura.9

Not less decisive is the testimony of Mr. Seymour, as regards the sentiments of the leading priests at Rome, and the predominating character of the worship of Italy. The following instructive conversation passed one day between him and one of the Jesuits, on the subject of the worship of the Virgin.

“My clerical friend,” says Mr. Seymour, “resumed the conversation, and said, that the worship of the Virgin Mary was a growing worship in Rome,–that it was increasing in depth and intenseness of devotion,–and that there were now many of their divines–and he spoke of himself as agreeing with them in sentiment–who were teaching, that as a woman brought in death, so a woman was to bring in life,–that as a woman brought in sin, so a woman was to bring in holiness,–that as Eve brought in damnation, so Mary was to bring in salvation,–and that the effect of this opinion was largely to increase the reverence and worship given to the Virgin Mary.”

“To prevent any mistake as to his views,” says Mr. Seymour, “I asked whether I was to understand him as implying, that as we regard Eve as the first sinner, so we are to regard Mary as the first Saviour,–the one as the author of sin, and the other as the author of the remedy.”

“He replied that such was precisely the view he wished to express; and he added, that it was taught by St. Alphonso de Liguori, and was a growing opinion.”10

But we can adduce still higher authority in proof of the charge that Rome now knows no other God than Mary, and worships no other Saviour than the Virgin. In the Encyclical Letter of Pius IX., issued on the 2d of February 1849, soliciting the suffrages of the Roman Catholic Church, preparatory to the decree of the pontiff on the doctrine of the immaculate conception, terms are applied to the Virgin Mary which plainly imply that she is possessed of divine fulness and perfection, and that she discharges the office of Redeemer to the Church, “The most illustrious prelates, the most venerable canonical chapters, and the religious congregations,” says the Pope, “rival each other in soliciting that permission should be granted to add and pronounce aloud and publicly, in the sacred Liturgy, and in the preface of the mass to the blessed Virgin Mary, the word ‘immaculate;’ and to define it as a doctrine of the Catholic Church, that the conception of the blessed Virgin Mary was entirely immaculate, and absolutely exempt from all stain of original sin.” The document then rises into a strain of commingled blasphemy and idolatry, in which the perfections of God and the work of Christ are ascribed to the Virgin, who “is raised, by the greatness of her merits, above all the choirs of angels, up to the throne of God; who has crushed under the foot of her virtues the head of the old serpent.11 The foundation of our confidence is in the Most Holy Virgin, since it is in her that God has placed the plenitude of all good, in such sort, that if there be in us any hope,–if there be any spiritual health,–we know that it is from her that we receive it,–because it is the will of Him who hath willed that we should have all by the instrumentality of Mary.” We need no other evidence of Rome’s idolatry. The document, it is true, is not a formal deed of the Church; but the difference is one of form only; for the pontiff assures us that the sentiments it contains are not his own only, but those of “the most illustrious prelates, venerable canonical chapters, and religious congregations;” and of course the sentiments are shared in by a vast majority of the members of the Church. The document fully installs Mary in the office of Saviour, and exalts her to the throne of God; for, in the first place, it expressly applies to her the prophecy in Eden, and ascribes to her the work then foretold,–crushing the head of the serpent; and, in the second place, it applies to Mary the ascription of Paul to Christ,–”In him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,” and in doing so, exalts her to the throne of mediatorial power and blessing. The pontifical decree on the subject of the immaculate conception may after this be spared. Already Rome has consummated her idolatry, and its evidence is complete. That Church has installed Mary in the office of Redeemer, and exalted her to the throne of Deity.

To raise Mary to an equality with God, is virtually to place her above Him; for God can have no rival. But Roman Catholic writers teach, in express terms, that she is superior. In invoking her, they hold it warrantable to ask her to lay her commands upon her Son, which implies her superiority in power to Him to whom, the Bible teaches, “all power in heaven and in earth has been committed.” And, second, they teach that she is superior in mercy, and that she hears prayer, and pities and delivers the sinner, when Christ will not.12 This doctrine has not only been taught in words, but has been exhibited in symbol, and that in so grotesque a way, that for the moment we forget its blasphemy. In the dream of St. Bernard,–which forms the subject of an altar-piece in a church at Milan,–two ladders were seen reaching from earth to heaven. At the top of one of the ladders stood Christ, and at the top of the other stood Mary. Of those who attempted to enter heaven by the ladder of Christ, not one succeeded,–all fell back. Of those who ascended by the ladder of Mary, not one failed. The Virgin, prompt to succour, stretched out her hand; and, thus aided, the aspirants ascended with ease.13

Exodus 20:3-5 (KJV) 3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;”
There is no way around God’s CLEAR COMMAND not to WORSHIP ANYONE OR THING OUTSIDE of God himself,NOT ONE EXCUSE given by Catholics for the WORSHIP of Saints,or MARY…HOLDS ANY WATER IN THE LIGHT OF THIS COMMANDMENT….IT IS IDOL WORSHIP IN THE HIGHEST DEGREE!! Please bear with me as I give this Important information about the Antichrist system alive in the world today,before going on to the Book of Revelation,THIS IS THE GROUND WORK NECESSARY TO PROVE HISTORICISM’S CASE!

8 Comments »

  1. I drop a leave a response each time I appreciate a post on a website or I have something to valuable to
    contribute to the conversation. Usually it is a result of the fire communicated in the post I browsed.

    And on this article ANTICHRIST PROOFING YOUR BIBLE STUDY!
    Getting to the Truth! Who is the Anti-Christ? Anti-Christ [An Historical Figure] is Hidding today in plain sight of
    the real Church! | Will You Let God Set You Free!?. I was excited enough to drop a
    thought :) I do have 2 questions for you if you
    do not mind. Is it simply me or does it look as if
    like a few of the remarks appear like they are left
    by brain dead visitors? :-P And, if you are posting at additional sites,
    I would like to follow you. Could you make a list every one of all your social pages
    like your Facebook page, twitter feed, or linkedin profile?

    Comment by kredyty ekonomia — June 23, 2013 @ 8:05 AM

  2. I’m totally new to the blog scene and now I wonder which cms is best? Some people have recommended me to try out Blogger. Do you personally think the latest version of BlogEngine is better?

    Comment by Bleaching — June 21, 2011 @ 3:25 PM

  3. realy good information

    Comment by blogg.no — June 15, 2010 @ 4:06 PM

  4. nice design!= and greate news

    Comment by ChierbBorie — June 7, 2010 @ 9:52 AM

  5. Great post, thanks!
    Отличный постб спасибо!

    Сумерки 3

    Comment by Sumerki — May 23, 2010 @ 5:34 AM

  6. Thanks for this great post! I’m new reader of your blog ;)

    Comment by SoloTeens — April 24, 2010 @ 11:16 PM

  7. I consider, that you are mistaken. I can prove it.

    Comment by generic — March 5, 2010 @ 12:46 PM

  8. Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ministerofblog: “ANTICHRIST PROOFING” YOUR BIBLE STUDY! Getting to the Truth! Who is the Anti-Christ? http://tinyurl.com/yhhhqxr

    Trackback by uberVU - social comments — February 18, 2010 @ 2:14 AM


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply or a Testimony

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Silver is the New Black Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.