The Pope is the Antichrist
SAYS THE BIBLE
INDEX
I do not believe any
Bible prophet was able to foresee the future.
The belief that they could has caused untold damage with its influence
on politics especially in relation to
The most bizarre
fact is that Bible prophecies that condemn the Roman Catholic Church as the
whore of Babylon and the pope as one who leads you away from the real Jesus are
spot on the mark as regards seeing events that hadn’t happened yet though they
were written before the Roman Church was founded by Constantine and Pope
Damasus I when they pulled a lump of the Church away from its roots forming
another Church that claimed identity with the old. I am not saying the Roman Church is the whore
of
The Bible is believed by millions to predict the coming of the papal antichrist.
I am indebted to Is
the Papacy Predicted by St Paul? and Roman Catholicism Tested by the
Scriptures for this research. I
include some ideas of my own.
2 Thessalonians
2:1-13 says that the son of perdition and man of sin will sit in the
This tells us that
the antichrist will not openly defy Christ but will do what only Christ has the
right to do. The temple is the Church
for the
This was the only
good prophecy that Paul made. God would
want it to be fulfilled in the early centuries of the Church for the sake of
believers to convince them that Paul was a prophet. Therefore the prophecy can only mean the
pope. And even more so when it was
distributed through the
Cardinal Manning stated
that the pope claims to be the subject of no secular ruler and claims to be the
supreme judge and director of the consciences of all men be they kings or
obscure peasants and to be the last and supreme judge of what is right and
wrong and that it is necessary for salvation to be subject to the pope and this
is approved by the clergy (Question 490, Radio Replies 3).
The Bible teaches
the doctrine of the rapture or as some call it the translation. According to this interesting doctrine, the
true members of God’s Church will disappear from the earth before the great
tribulation (the final world war accompanied by plague and corruption) and the
second coming of Jesus and the grace of conversion will be cut off so that
there will be no Church on the earth except false Christian ones. The saved dead will disappear from their
graves. The doctrine is certainly
biblical as you will see from the Rogma Bible Course. You can find this course on the Internet by
doing a search for Rogma. It is taught
at 1 Corinthians
The fact that Roman
Catholicism is such a huge empire and it claims to be the Church of Christ
contradicting the New Testament which states that Christianity is to be a
minority religion with few members proves that it is an antichrist and the man
who leads it is not appointed by God but a barrier between God and
humankind. Christ said that we must try
to get through the narrow gate for most will be left outside of it. Catholics might say that he meant that only a
few had the truth then but it is no longer true but they don’t believe this at
all for they say God gives everybody enough truth to be saved so that they
might come to him despite having a distorted image of him so that nobody has an
excuse. A narrow gate implies a
restriction God has set up, if you don’t have the pure gospel of Jesus but a
distortion there will be no salvation.
Jesus might have told the disciples to teach all nations and make
disciples of them which is a command.
This however gives no support to the view that success in evangelisation
indicates having the true gospel. Jesus
only said try to convert all but he didn’t say this should be outstandingly
successful. Success in evangelisation
would indicate that the faith preached is anti-god for the Bible teaches that
we are born hating God and usually die in the same condition (Romans 3) though
many of his enemies do a good job of convincing themselves that they are true
servants of God.
Some Roman Catholics
deny that the pope could be the Antichrist for 1 John 2:22 says that he who
denies that Jesus has come in the flesh is an Antichrist and 1 John 4:3 says
that denial of the fleshy existence of Jesus is of the spirit of the Antichrist
while the pope believes that Jesus did live among as a man. But all the epistle is saying is that the
Antichrist influences the heresy and makes it progress by his black magic. It does not say it will be the only heresy he
will do this for. When he comes he might
find no need to deny that Jesus had a body.
He will promote whatever heresy suits him in the war against Christ.
What is more
important is why the Antichrist would deny that Jesus has a body. The reason is to stop people having the
beliefs about Jesus that they need for salvation. If the gospel of the pope is incompatible
with these beliefs then the pope is definitely an Antichrist if not the
Antichrist. John says that the
Antichrist is coming but many Antichrists have come which indicates that it is
the last hour (1 John
Even if John said
that the Antichrist will definitely deny that Jesus came in the flesh and was
the Christ the papacy denies both doctrines not verbally but the way denying it
counts – in action. The pope has set
himself and the Church up as the interpretators of Jesus. So Jesus can’t have his own say and they do
the talking for him meaning that Jesus is not being followed but the pope and
the Church are being followed and they trick you to think that it is Jesus you
serve. Denying outright that Jesus came
in the flesh would not be as dangerous as doing it without anybody
noticing. The Catholic Church then is as
lethal as the Antichrist meaning it must belong to him for nobody could surpass
him in opposing Christ and damaging the
Following an interpretation of Jesus Christ is following an interpretation not Jesus. The Catholic Church offers a Jesus who is another Jesus in the eyes of the apostle Paul (Galatians 1). This is worse than the ghostly Jesus of the Docetists. He is as unreal as any abstraction.
John said that we
must test the spirits and we must do it by asking the spirit if it believes
that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. If
it says he has, then it is from God (1 John 4:1-3). Had there been a pope in those days he would
have told us to check what the spirit says alongside the statements of the
pope. That would be a more reliable and
thorough test if the claims of the pope to be the source of divine truth along
with the Church (since 1870 he no longer needs the consent of the Church to
give infallible revelations so he is potentially the ONLY source) is true. A spirit could tell you that Jesus came in
the flesh and was the Christ and still lead you astray. My belief is that John would have replied
that because there was no evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ apart from
a few men claiming visions of him that no demon would say Jesus existed. That is the only way to make sense of John
here. Demons would not support the
belief that Jesus Christ came in the flesh for knowing that doctrine was
necessary for salvation. That means that
if they could get you to believe in another Jesus this doctrine would be no
good.
Some Protestants believe that the denial that Jesus came in
the flesh really refers to the Roman Catholic denial that Jesus was born of a
sinful mother. The flesh stands for what
is inclined in us to turn away from God.
They say Jesus had this kind of flesh but he did not allow it to cause
him to sin. They say that Jesus earned
our salvation by chiefly by refusing to sin despite his inclinations to sin
which he managed to triumph over and to undermine this doctrine by saying he
was born of a sinless mother who couldn’t pass on sinful inclinations to him is
to adopt a heresy that prevents salvation.
But if Jesus could be sinless and yet be in danger of committing it so
could Mary his mother.
I reject this interpretation of the Roman Catholic denial on the basis that there is no need for it and there were people who held that Jesus’ flesh was not real. But those who accept the interpretation argue that since the pope says Jesus was born of a sinless mother he was not born with flesh like ours in every respect so the pope is the antichrist for he denies the coming of Jesus in the flesh. It is correct in the respect that if Jesus was born of a sinless mother he was not like us in all things but sin. He had to feel temptation and be in danger of succumbing to it like the rest of us so he needed to be born of a woman who was flawed and who tried to put bad influences his way. The whole point of insisting that Jesus had to be fully human was that in his rejection of sin he did good for us in our place and had to be one of us to atone for us. The pope then in a sense denies the coming of Jesus in the flesh which means his doctrine of Jesus cannot save.
The Protestants
point out that the Bible says God told the serpent who tempted Adam and Eve to
sin that the seed of the woman would crush his head and it would bruise his
heel (Genesis 3:15). If Jesus didn’t
have a sinful nature he didn’t have a full humanity and so he didn’t come in
the flesh they say. He wouldn’t be the
seed of the sinful woman. What was said
to Eve was said to all women with her as representative because the curses put
on her affect all women. If Mary was
sinless she would not have been included and so she couldn’t have been the
mother of Jesus. God said he would put
enmity between the woman’s seed and the serpent – the both would have a terrible
dislike for each other. If Jesus was
stronger than Satan there would no point in this bad feeling, he would only be
hurting himself. The dislike was
necessary for the seed needed it to fight him.
So in this light the Protestants seem to be right. The Catholic Church denies the proper
humanity of Christ and so it is the antichrist.
Some of the heretics condemned by the John writings believed there was indeed a flesh and blood man but he was taken over and possessed by Jesus, a spirit being from God or God himself, at the baptism in the Jordan and which left him on the cross leading him to cry that he was forsaken by God. They denied that the man was saviour or the Son of God or the Christ. What was these things or some of them was the being that possessed him.
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that bread can be turned into Jesus without any perceptible physical change taking place. It is no longer bread but Jesus. This change takes place in the Mass by the power of the priest. The Church says that what makes bread bread turns into whatever it is that makes Jesus Jesus. So the taste and appearance and weight etc of the bread remain but whatever makes it bread is turned into whatever it is that makes it Jesus. Whatever makes bread bread and whatever makes Jesus Jesus is something non-physical or immaterial. This is clearly turning Jesus into a spirit not a real body. It is as good as calling a non-change a change. Rome says Jesus can exist as a man without having his eyes, ears, smell, sense of touch and taste. The real Jesus, his substance, his nature, have nothing to do with these senses. He cannot look at you from the communion wafer he turns into. This doctrine is even more non-Christian than the notion that the heretics had that Jesus had senses but was not a man but a ghostly being or was a spirit with senses possessing a man.
So the doctrine of bread and wine changing into Jesus in the Mass implies that Jesus is not a material being.
The Bible symbolises grace as food. Grace means help from God that makes us holy and good. God helps the soul change from one kind of person to a better one. The Church says the body and blood of Jesus in communion are spiritual food and drink. They feed us with grace. But that makes no sense. We would not need the body and blood of Jesus if we only need grace. If we need the body and blood, then they are not body and blood anymore but turned into grace. But grace is not a thing. Its an effect. Again the need to eat and drink Jesus implies his body and blood are not real.
Many scholars believe that the condemnation of those who deny the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh refers to those who think Jesus rose not physically but spiritually from the dead. They think the coming does not mean Jesus' being born into this world but his coming back from the dead in the resurrection. In other words, he was a ghost. If so, then the Catholic Church is antichrist. It teaches that Jesus was a man but after his resurrection his body and blood were glorified and changed radically. It says that without this radical change we would not be able to believe that bread and wine could become his body and blood.
Whatever Jesus meant when he reportedly said we must gnaw his flesh as food it certainly was not anything like the Catholic doctrine which claims that bread turns into Jesus' flesh but doesn't claim it in any meaningful sense or in a way that makes any sense. An eye sees. If the eye disappears and is turned into a marble in the way the Catholic Church says it can happen it is not an eye anymore. End of. And if the eye is like Jesus and doesn't disappear but a marble is turned into it there is no difference. What happened to the eye's power to see which was part of itself? Gone. An eye is for seeing and a true eye can see. If it cannot see anymore it is not an eye for a marble cannot see. The Jesus of Catholicism that it worships in the form of the wafer is not Jesus. We all at least subconsciously know that a marble which has been transubstantiated into an eye is not an eye and it makes no sense to say it is. Catholic worship of the wafer is really just worship of a wafer and on some level they know it.
Rome says that the risen supernatural body of Jesus is what is present in the Eucharist. It says there were would be problems with the doctrine were it the ordinary normal body of Jesus that were present. This is a case of solving a contradiction or absurdity by claiming that a miracle can explain it. It is no different from saying that it is a problem believing that the puddle at the top of the stairs appeared naturally so it appeared supernaturally and that solves it! The Eucharist opposes reason and undermines anything history says even if it says there was a man called Jesus.
According to Roman Catholicism, Jesus supposedly turned bread and wine into his body and blood before the crucifixion. If he could do that then he already had the magical body though it appeared otherwise. Thus the Docetists were right that Jesus was not a proper body but a magical apparition that could behave like a body. Thus if the Docetists were antichrists then so is the Roman Church.
Roman Catholicism is antichrist according to the scriptures.
Daniel 7 describes a
prophetic vision which shows the rise of four nations which are symbolised as
beasts. Everybody agrees that the
nations are
The Catholic Truth
Society booklet, The Beasts and the Little Horn, tries to refute the
identification of the little horn with the papacy.
First of all it
considers the 666 which is given in the Book of Revelation as referring to the
Antichrist. It tells us that St Irenaeus
claimed to have had statements from people who knew the author of the Book of
Revelation who said that 666 was the right number. They must have told him that it stood for a
name for Irenaeus was so sure that it did and Nero, the usual identification,
was not mentioned. It seems that the 666
is not Nero. The booklet informs us that
if the author had wanted to hide Nero’s name in 666 then it would have been to
avoid offending the
The Bible says the
Antichrist’s religion will try to change the word of God and his law.
The Catholic Church
changes the Law of God because it tampered with the Ten Commandments. It did away with the commandment to have no
graven images in worship and it awkwardly broke the last commandment which
forbids coveting into two to make up the ten.
By putting the graven images ban together with the first commandment to
have only one God it made it look like as if only graven images of false Gods
were forbidden.
The Catholic Church
without any authorisation from the apostles changed the Sabbath from Saturday
to Sunday.
The Catholic Church
ignores Jesus’ rule that you may treat one who has sinned against you as a
pariah if he doesn’t repent at the behest of the Church (Matthew
The Catholic Church
ignores the divine law that what can’t look after itself is not a God to teach
that the communion wafer is God.
The Church gives men the power to decide who is going to Hell. If the Catholic Church forbids you to have the sacraments to take away your serious sin chances are you will end up in Hell. With all the mistrust of leaders that comes across in the Bible with God not wanting to give Israel a king and Jesus saying the only kind of leaders he would allow would be ones that served and had no power to abuse this is clearly a blasphemous practice. Ideas like that the priest is needed to give you the sacraments and that he is the one you have to go to if you want salvation exalt the priest too much, he is made higher than a king and than your own mother and father and yourself. These ideas are dangerous and make many people unable to disobey the priest so that even if they met Jesus and he commanded something different he could be sure he would be ignored.
ROME HAS SPOKEN, A
GUIDE TO FORGOTTEN PAPAL STATEMENTS AND HOW THEY HAVE CHANGED THROUGH THE
CENTURIES, Maureen Fiedler and Linda Rabben (Editors), Crossroad Publishing,
New York, 1998 is a book that tells us how much Rome has changed in its
official declarations of what God wants us to do and how to live. Despite claiming that ancient tradition is
the word of God the Church changes it.
This is the religion then that lies to us telling us that it has never
changed for it is guided by the Holy Spirit and cannot err. When the Church changes its own version of
the word of God what will it do to God’s?
And the Church has been creating and authorising and using corrupt
Bibles, the Vulgate, for instance so it has been physically changing the word
of God. It has stopped doing that now
for it prefers to run down the Bible as inaccurate when it says something that
doesn’t suit its current policies but there still many Catholic Bibles with
objectionable translations in them. This
put the curse of the Book of Revelation on the Church (Revelation 22:18,19)
which curses those who change or subtract or add to the Book of Revelation for
it is the word of God and by implication the same curse is on anybody who
interferes with any other book of scripture. Revelation deals with the end times and yet
the Church allows and even sometimes approves of apparitions with end time
prophecies which is the same thing as changing the Book of Revelation which
warns that its prophecies are not to be added to. An apparition can come along and tell you
that a pope is coming who will do this and that while in fact the Revelation
could be coming true from next week on.
The apparition will be trying to prevent preparation for it and contest
it. So all apparitions with prophecies
oppose the Revelation which commands us to live as if it will start to come
true in the next few minutes for it has Christ commanding us to think and live
as if he is coming very soon, “”Behold I am coming soon.” Coming up with a new revelation that affects
the interpretation of Revelation is the same thing as adding to it for it
changes its meaning, the thing you would be wanting to do if you physically
stuck in new verses you had made up. The
Antichrist will certainly want to distort the message of Revelation.
The
The
Bible identifies the pope as the Antichrist. This
warns that his doctrines are dangerous.
Protestants must be persuaded of this so that their efforts to ruin the
credibility of the Roman Catholic faith may have greater success. Protestantism is more open to sceptical
influence than Catholicism which is why it is better to promote it as the
lesser evil.
WORKS CONSULTED
A GREAT LEGACY, Rev RJ Coates,
A PATH FROM
A ROMAN CATECHISM WITH A REPLY THERETO, John Wesley
Protestant Truth Society,
A WOMAN RIDES THE BEAST, Dave Hunt, Harvest House,
ALL ONE BODY – WHY DON’T WE AGREE? Erwin W Lutzer,
AN ACCOUNT OF ARCHBISHOP JAMES USHER 1581-1656, ND Emerson
MA PhD,
APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION, James Heron, Outlook Press,
BIBLICAL EXEGESIS AND CHURCH DOCTRINE, Raymond E Brown,
Paulist Press,
BUT THE BIBLE DOES NOT SAY SO, Rev Roberto Nisbet, Church
Book Room Press,
BY FAITH ALONE, RC Sproul, Hodder & Stoughton,
CATECHISM OF THE
CATHOLICISM AND CHRISTIANITY, Cecil John Cadoux, George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1928
CATHOLICISM AND FUNDAMENTALISM, Karl Keating, Ignatius
Press,
CHRISTIANS GUIDE TO ROMAN CATHOLICISM, Bill Jackson,
Colonial Baptist Press,
CITY OF
DAWN OR TWILIGHT? HM Carson, IVP, Leicester, 1976
DEAR CATHOLIC FRIEND, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord,
DIFFICULTIES, Mgr Ronald Knox and Sir Arnold Lunn, Eyre
& Spottiswoode,
DOCUMENTS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, edited by Henry
Bettenson, Oxford University Press,
EVANGELICAL CATHOLICS A NEW PHENOMENON,
FUTURIST OR HISTORICIST? Basil C Mowll, Protestant Truth
Society,
HANDBOOK TO THE CONTROVERSY WITH
HOW SURE ARE THE FOUNDATIONS? Colin Badger, Wayside
INFALLIBILITY IN THE CHURCH, Patrick Crowley, CTS,
IS THE
IS THERE SALVATION OUTSIDE THE
LETTERS TO A ROMAN CATHOLIC
PRIEST, H A Ironside, Loizeaux Brothers,
LION CONCISE BOOK OF CHRISTIAN
THOUGHT,
OUGHT I TO SEND MY CHILD TO A
POPE FICTION Patrick Madrid Basilica Press,
REVELATION ITS GRAND CLIMAX AT HAND! Watchtower Bible and Tract
Society of
ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS, Charles Gore MA, Longmans,
ROMAN CATHOLIC OBJECTIONS ANSWERED,
Rev H O Lindsay, John T Drought Ltd,
ROMAN CATHOLIC TEACHING CONTRASTED
WITH BIBLE TEACHING, Bernard Burt, The Bible Student Press,
ROMAN CATHOLICISM TESTED BY THE SCRIPTURES, John A Coleman,
New Litho Pty. Ltd,
ROMAN CATHOLICISM WHAT IS FINAL AUTHORITY? Harold J Berry, Back to the Bible,
ROMAN CATHOLICISM,
ROMANISM AT VARIANCE WITH THE BIBLE, Rev James Gardner,
Protestant Truth Society,
SALVATION, THE BIBLE AND ROMAN CATHOLICISM, William Webster,
Banner of Truth,
SECRETS OF ROMANISM, Joseph Zacchello, Loizeaux Brothers,
THE ADVANCE OF ROMANISM, S M Houghton, Cotswold Bible Witness, 1964
THE BEASTS AND THE LITTLE HORN, Rev George S Hitchcock DD,
Catholic Truth Society,
THE BIBLE OR THE CHURCH? Ken Camplin, Printland Publishers,
THE BIBLE REFUTES ROMANISM Philip H Rand Protestant Truth
Society,
THE
THE CHURCH AND INFALLIBILITY, BC
THE CHURCH OF ROME AND THE WORD OF GOD, Rev Eric C Last,
Protestant Truth Society,
THE DEVELOPMENTS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM, John A Bain MA,
Oliphant Anderson & Ferrier,
THE INCREDIBLE CREED OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES, Dr L Rumble MSC, Catholic Truth Society, London, undated
THE POWER AND THE GLORY, Inside the Dark Heart of John Paul II's Vatican, David Yallop, Constable, London, 2007
THE PRIMITIVE FAITH AND ROMAN CATHOLIC DEVELOPMENTS, Rev
John A F Gregg BD, APCK,
THE RICHES OF
THE STUDENT’S CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, Rev Charles Hart BA, Burns
& Oates,
THE
THE
TRADITIONAL DOCTRINES OF THE
TREASURES FROM GOD’S STOREHOUSE, Dr Bill Jackson, Colonial
Baptist Press,
VICARS OF CHRIST, Peter De Rosa, Corgi Books,
WHAT HAPPENED!
Francisco Lacueva, Evangelical Protestant Society,
WHY I AM NOT A ROMAN CATHOLIC, Rev Canon McCormick DD,
Protestant Truth Society,
YOU CAN LEAD ROMAN CATHOLICS TO CHRIST, Wilson Ewin,
The WWW
www.biblelight.net/keating.htm
A Challenge to
Catholic Apologist Karl Keating
20 5 2008