Anonymous ID: 1312e8 April 4, 2018, 4:47 p.m. No.897668   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7912

Luther said in about 1520 that the Pope is the antichrist precisely BECAUSE he is found in the middle of Christ's church, pretending to rule over it. He didn't come up with the idea. Hus said it before him, and some monks said it before either of them.

 

The fools on here saying that the church itself is bad or unnecessary are also antichrists, just like Mohammed or Karl Marx were antichrists. They just aren't THE antichrist; because the antichrist sits in the temple of God, claiming to be God.

 

It's not just because this pope is a communist and says there is no hell that he's the antichrist. All popes are the antichrist. Their seat is the seat of antichrist, because the papal throne claims to be over the church and identical with Christ's throne, even when the papacy denies the gospel of Christ.

 

If the pope is involved in a conspiracy to establish a world government, it should come as no surprise. The papacy has been doing this since the middle ages at least.

 

"For Paul, 2 Thess. 2:3, in describing to the Thessalonians Antichrist, calls him 'an adversary of Christ, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God.' He speaks therefore of one ruling in the Church, not of heathen kings, and he calls this one the adversary of Christ, because he will devise doctrine conflicting with the Gospel, and will assume to himself divine authority….The Pope exercises a twofold tyranny: he defends his errors by force and by murders, and forbids judicial examination [of his teaching[. The latter does even more injury than any executions, because, when the true judgment of the Church is removed, godless dogmas and godless services cannot be removed, and for many ages they destroy innumerable souls." Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, par. 39, 51

Anonymous ID: 1312e8 April 4, 2018, 4:48 p.m. No.897697   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>897670

The Mexican Revolution attempted to break the church's control over Mexican government and was successful to a great degree. But the Roman church still has a great deal of influence over the people in Mexico and all of Latin America.

Anonymous ID: 1312e8 April 4, 2018, 5:06 p.m. No.897971   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>897942

Bro, no one called the bishop of Rome supreme pontiff of the whole church in the early days of the church, or for hundreds of years after. When they started claiming that, the Eastern church split with the West.

Anonymous ID: 1312e8 April 4, 2018, 5:11 p.m. No.898051   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>8087 >>8096

>>897950

"IN 1 Cor. 3:6, Paul makes ministers equal, and teaches that the Church is above the ministers. Hence superiority or lordship over the Church or the rest of the ministers is not ascribed to Peter [in preference to other apostles.] For he says thus: 'All things are yours, whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas', i.e., let neither the other ministers nor Peter assume for themselves lordship or superiority over the Church; let them not burden the Church with traditions; let not the authority of any avail more than the Word [or God]; let not the authority of Cephas be opposed to the authority of the other apostles, as they reasoned at that time: 'Cephas, who is an apostle of higher rank, observes this; therefore, both Paul and the rest ought to observe this.' Paul removes this pretext from Peter, and denies [Not so, says Paul, and makes Peter doff his little hat, namely, the claim] that his authority is to be preferred to the rest or to the Church."

 

"Of the Power and Primacy of the Pope", par. 11