RSS

Category Archives: #CULTS

THE MARKETING AND EXPLOITATION OF THE CROSS: COMMERCIALIZING CHRISTIANITY

THE MARKETING AND EXPLOITATION OF THE CROSS: COMMERCIALIZING CHRISTIANITY.

 

ALLEVIATING THE PROTESTANT INFERIORITY COMPLEX

Yesterday, I argued that humble popes don’t exist. They’re mythical because it’s categorically impossible to receive the unbiblical role of supreme pontiff, make people kiss your hand and call you “holy father,” and then be able to travel under the descriptor “humble.” The papacy is an act of self-excommunication from the Church, albeit with no small amount of flair. And therein lay the rub and temptation for many Christians.
I heartily agree with Clint’s previous post, and am not suggesting you begin a conversation with Joe Catholics with the foregoing. Yet, I believe it’s pastorally important to remind Christians that the Pope has no clothes. As Rome’s pomp and circumstance gets paraded on CNN, Christians too often begin to view their own churches and traditions with more of a jaundiced eye. In an age of plastic, self-designed spirituality, who can deny the appeal of firm traditions made of stone and mortar? And the traditions of Roman Catholicism would indeed hold beauty, if they weren’t false.
The Ruinous Appeal of Roman Catholicism
CharlesHodgeIn one of his chapel sermons, Charles Hodge described the danger that lurks within the papacy:
It would to human view be a blessed thing to have a succession of apostles, i.e., of holy men, infallible in their judgments, to settle all points of doctrine, to remove all doubts, to solve all questions of conscience, and to rule with undeviating righteousness over the whole Church.
And when to this is added, on the assumed primacy of Peter, and of his successor, the Bishop of Rome, as the representative of Christ, we have the beau ideal of a theocracy for the Church and ultimately for the world.
But in proportion as this theory is good if true, it is destructive if false. If the prelates are not apostles, have not their gifts, their infallibility or authority, then for sinful, erring, wicked men to claim their prerogatives is ruinous. To be under the guidance of a good angel is a blessing; but to be under the guidance of Satan, in the guise of an angel of light, is destructive (Princeton Sermons, pp. 51-52).
It would be foolish to deny the manifest beauty of Rome’s clout and tradition, especially when compared to our own. Most of our congregations inhabit buildings with far less swank than St. Peter’s, they’re led by pastors who have a whole lot less geopolitical and even ecclesiastical clout, and, as if that weren’t enough, our pastors likely have hat collections quite inferior to those of the Roman Curia.
So, should Christians feel inferior or be drawn by Rome’s external “beauties”? No, because we’re apart of the Church… while the Pope and his consistent adherents, sadly, are not. Roman Catholicism is, in fact, an “-ism,” not a “Church.” And so Roman Catholicism systematically cuts people off from our Lord Jesus, His Gospel, the hope of salvation in Him, and therefore, from the Church itself.
The papacy represents a destructive ruin that certainly deserves our pity and prayers, but not our admiration. This is what the Protestant Reformation was all about.
Reminding Ourselves of the Reformation
It seems apparent that we still need to reiterate this point. According to a recent CT article,Pope Francis Excites (Most) Evangelical Leaders. Since the Pope misrepresents theevangel, the gospel, I Papal Excitementfail to grasp how he could ever excite evangelicals. In the article, Leith Anderson suggests “Pope Francis can bring us back to the biblical and Christian care for the poor and vulnerable.” And Russell Moore hopes that Francis “spurs evangelicals like me to remember our mandate to love the least of these.”
Now, for the record, I am verysympathetic to Christians lovingly serving the poor in Christ. Before I entered the pastorate, I used to help churches do just that for a Christian relief organization. But my sympathies on that issue only heighten my concern about this evangelical “excitement.” If Roman Catholicism gets the Gospel wrong and is destructively “under the guidance of Satan, in the guise of an angel of light” why would we ever want it inflicted upon “the poor and vulnerable”? And since the pope’s very position contradicts biblical Christianity, how could we ever look to him to bring us back to anything “biblical and Christian”?
I do agree with one of Anderson’s statements, that “there are millions of people who don’t grasp the differences between Protestants and Catholics,” and that is exactly why I’m concerned to publicly teach that that the pope is (probably) the anti-Christ, Roman Catholicism is a ruin… but the Gospel of the Bible remains rich in hope.
Rejoicing in Our High Priest
Francis entered an office this week that has existed for centuries and is laden with ancient tradition – all the smells, bells, striking hats, and foreboding buildings that you could ever ask for in a religion. But dear Christian brethren, we are missing nothing. These are not the artifacts of a great unifying tradition. They are extravagant superstitions and evidences of schism, which exceed God’s Word (1 Cor 4:6) and tear apart the truth of Christ and His true Church. The succession of yet another pope is another chapter in Rome’s sad folly of nullifying the Gospel with silly hats and empty titles.
Wonderfully, the office of Priest over God’s House is not an open position, it’s been filled once for all! We have a merciful and faithful high priest (Heb 2:17). One who has passed through the heavens, bringing us to the throne of grace with confidence (Heb 4:15-16). One without a successor, without beginning or end (Heb 7:3) and who
holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever. Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them (Heb 7:24-25)
We have a tradition that’s even older than Roman Catholicism, the priesthood of Jesus Christ, our great and eternal High Priest. We do not need a Pope to lead us back to anything, for we are not helped by impressive leaders who boast in outward things (2 Cor 5:12). Nor should we be excited about man-made precepts like “do not handle,” “do not taste,” and “do not touch” – all of which merely appear wise, but are actually self-made religion without value in stopping sin (Col 2:20-23).
Christians, we have a Priest and what we need (and need our leaders to be excited about) is to believe His Gospel and to meet as local congregations to hear that Gospel preached, sung, and shown in the ordinances, on the basis of Scripture. And we need to encourage others, especially Roman Catholics, not to neglect this great salvation (Heb 2:3).
If you have these beautiful necessities, be grateful, exceedingly grateful. You’re a member of the Church.
 

HAS THE NEW AGE MOVEMENT INFILTRATED YOUR CHURCH?

By Nathan Jones
Evangelist & Web Minister
Dr. David Reagan and I were delighted to have as our guest on this week’s Christ in Prophecy Warren Smith, the author of the book The Light That Was Dark. This fascinating book tells Warren’s touching story of how, in his search for a Savior, he got sidetracked into the occultic darkness of the New Age Movement. From his many years of experience under that influence, Warren now has dedicated his life to warning Christians about the dangers of the New Age and help us recognize how we can avoid these satanic influences from creeping into our churches.

Basic Characteristics

Dr. Reagan: Warren, tell us, what are some of the basic characteristics of the New Age Movement?

Warren Smith: In 2 Corinthians 11, the Apostle Paul talks about the simplicity in Christ. There is a simplicity in deception as well. So, it’s really important that people don’t get confused.

There are so many different aspects of the deception of the New Age, what is now being called the New Spirituality, and even the New Worldview. New World Religion was the phrase used for a while, but a New Worldview is easier for people to remember.

Christians are being guided into this New Worldview thinking they will help the world come to peace. But, remember that in Daniel 8 we are told that the Antichrist is going to have a wonderful deception. He literally will destroy “wonderfully,” for by peace he shall destroy many.

All these deceptive end times teachings are heading up to where the world is going to be told to get in line, and “atonement” will be a word that will be used. But, those of us who were in the New Age understand that it is “at-one-ment”, not atonement, so much as “at-one-ment.” In other words, the New Age teaches that we are all one because God is in everyone and everything. And, when we recognize our oneness, we can all come together and help achieve world peace. Some Christian leaders are even buying into this by having materials that bring this oneness and this god-in-everything teaching into the Church.

Dr. Reagan: Let’s dwell a little bit longer here on the fundamental characteristics of the Movement. You boiled it all down to that the fundamental teaching of the New Age is God that He is in everything and is in us. That’s what Shirley MacLaine was doing when she stood on the seashore and yelled, “I am god, I am god, I am god!”

Warren Smith: She was the one who put that teaching forward back in 1987 on television. She may have become the butt of late night jokes, like in David Letterman’s jokes, but she’s the one primarily responsible for outing that teaching and getting the conversation going. That’s the big word these days — conversation. “Let’s have a conversation,” which really means, “Let’s see what we can do to compromise. Let’s get it all on the table and see what we can come up with.” That’s the idea that we can all move forward.

The year Shirley MacLaine started off teaching that we are all gods, that was in 1987, and that was the same year that Marilyn Ferguson the author of The Aquarian Conspiracy was on the Oprah Winfrey Show, on an episode entitled “The New Age Movement.” Back in 1980, Marilyn Ferguson wrote her book The Aquarian Conspiracy and in that book she said that basically we have a great idea, a great heretical idea, of God within and God is in everything. She said basically, “We are not going to be able to pull this off right away, but over time if it is widely publicized we will be able to have our way.” I mean, it was an outrageous thing to claim!

Actually, a lot of New Age leaders today are very upset that Ferguson used the word “conspiracy” in the title of her book, because it actually plays into the reality that there truly is a conspiracy, and the conspiracy is to get this great heretical idea that God indwells His creation and that God is in everyone and everything. She was trying to be cute.

The Shack

Nathan Jones: For awhile there, almost every church was preaching from and every Christian bookstore was carrying The Shack.

Warren Smith: The Shack was a very popular book, not only in the Christian world, but it was actually at the top of the New Age bestseller list as well.

People will claim, “Well, but Jesus is in there.” But, what a lot of people don’t understand is that from what I think was on page 112, the Jesus of The Shack said, “God who is the ground of all being dwells in and around and through all things.” Then, if you look carefully at the book when the word “Creation” is brought up, a capital “C” is used. Those of us from the New Age know that when you see creation with a capital “C”, it means that God indwells His creation.

Dr. Reagan: That is very different from what the Bible teaches. God is not indwelling His creation, right?

Warren Smith: No. Psalm 39:5 tells us, “Verily, every man at his best state is altogether vanity.” Or, in John 2:24-25, Jesus said referring to Jesus, “He did not commit himself to men because he knew what was in men.” Now, why would that be said if God is in man? Why wouldn’t He be emphasizing that? Instead, Jesus was actually saying to the effect, “Watch out! Men amongst themselves can be very dangerous.” That is what Jesus was teaching. So, no, God is not within each person.

Deceptive Teachers

Dr. Reagan: Oprah Winfrey, she has been sort of a high priestess of this whole New Age Movement, with one New Age writer and speaker after another being paraded on her program. Would you quickly mention some other New Age names from the secular world that people might recognize that they should be aware of?

Warren Smith: Sure. Oprah had M. Scott Peck on her program back in the early 90’s. A lot of people don’t realize, though Scott Peck described himself as a Christian, he is really more of kind of like an emerging contemplative New Age Christian, because in his book he said, “God is within everybody.” He actually laid out a plan when he said, “We’re in crisis!” That’s also what The Aquarian Conspiracysaid to the effect, “We are in crisis and we need to have a new way of looking at things. We need a new worldview.”

What Peck basically said was, “Our salvation lies in community.” He didn’t say “in Jesus Christ,” but in community. He said that due to the duress of these times, we need to change some of our rules; and yes, that includes the Church. So, he too was introducing this idea of God-in-all.

I wrote an article years ago about M. Scott Peck and the Community of the Cosmic Christ. Starting off the article, there was a big quote by Peck saying that the mystical prophet who is bringing forth this idea of sort of a quantum leap into a new level of understanding was the Catholic Jesuit priest Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. He was the father of the New Age Movement. The titleThe Aquarian Conspiracy was taken by Chardin. Chardin said, “This soul must be a conspiracy of individuals.” And Chardin’s teachings are simply this — that God is in every atom.

Nathan Jones: That rather sounds like Star Wars which is pantheism, right?

Warren Smith: May the force be with you! Yes, this force is God penetrating His creation, but that He comes in various ways.

Other New Age teachers are Deepak Chopra, Betty Eadie and Shirley MacLaine.

Dr. Oz

Warren Smith: Mehmet Oz, of the Dr. Oz fame, was for five years featured on Oprah Winfrey. Now he has his own program. Dr. Oz is probably one of the more dangerous, and I say that carefully, occultists out there. He has endorsed a book by a psychic by the name of Ainslie MacLeod. The book is called The Instruction. Dr. Oz has a front cover endorsement. In that book the psychic refers to spirit guides 175 times, with 40 before you get to chapter one. He talks about past lives. He encourages the reader to get into meditation and to contact their spirit guides.

Dr. Oz has also brought forward transcendental meditation,which Oz says he does. This is known as reiki, which is a very dangerous sort of body treatment that includes spirit guides. The reiki practitioners make it very clear that spirit guides are involved in that process.

Dr. Reagan: But these people are so nice, loving, and so smooth.

Warren Smith: In my days when I was a social worker and also in the New Age, some people thought I was kind of nice. But, as you know, niceness doesn’t have much to do with it. We have some pastors out there who seem pretty nice, but they are bringing a lot of this New Age teaching into their churches.

Dr. Reagan: In fact, the Antichrist is going to be very nice.

Warren Smith: Back to Dr. Oz, he teaches New Age through holistic health. One well known pastor actually said that if you try to change your diet you’ll have to be careful, because you could end up changing your worldview. That very well could happen. With Dr. Oz, one well known Christian pastor has actually brought him into his church to teach his congregation how to be healthy!

Lord Maitreya

Nathan Jones: Speaking of the Antichrist, you always hear in the New Age Movement of this Lord Maitreya. Can you explain a little to me if he is supposed to be the Antichrist, or as New Agers believe, he is the Messiah of the New Age Movement?

Warren Smith: Benjamin Creme was like Maitreya’s John the Baptist. In 1982, there was a full page ad in newspapers all around the world saying, “The Christ is here, and he is waiting to be called forth.” Benjamin Creme was on coast to coast radio probably four or five times over the last decade saying the very same thing. He was saying that Maitreya is still waiting to be called forth. A lot of people have just dismissed it as a bad joke.

What I show in my book is that what Maitreya teaches is absolutely consistent with A Course in Miracles, with New Age Leader Barbara Marx Hubbard’s teachings, with Neale Donald Walsch’sConversations With God, and with everything that Oprah Winfrey, Deepak Chopra and Dr. Oz are teaching.

It’s all the same bottom line — New Age teachings.

Watch the full interview with Warren Smith!
Watch Christ in Prophecy
 

PETRUS ROMANUS ARRIVES ON 3/13/2013 AT 20:13 HOURS!!!!

 – Christ Putnam – http://www.logosapologia.org/?p=4794
According to the prophecy of St. Malachy, Petrus Romanus has arrived. Pope Francis I, formerly known as Jorge Mario Bergoglio, was the son of an Italian railroad worker from Turin, Italy. While those of shallow vision will be quick to point out “his name is not Peter,” prophecy is often fulfilled enigmatically in a manner not entirely clear until it is resolved. For example, who could have known that “labor of the sun” John Paul II would be buried during eclipse until his papacy had ended? We have stated from the beginning that the title “Peter the Roman” was likely symbolic. All popes claim apostolic succession from Peter and for this reason it is called the Petrine office. For instance, Tom Horn stated in a recent interview for World Net Daily:
Regardless, Horn said he’s always maintained that it doesn’t take someone whose Christian name is Peter to fulfill the prophecy. “In fact, if any Italian is elected, that would be a fairly transparent fulfillment,” he said. Moreover, he argued, “in a very general sense, every pope could be regarded as ‘Peter the Roman,’ and in that sense, this could be the last one.”[1]
Rome was an empire and a city so his Italian ancestry arguably meets the Roman aspect albeit in an oblique way. Interestingly, Rene Thibaut, the Jesuit who wrote in 1950 that the papacy would be abdicated in 2012, rejected the possibility of a pope named Peter and wrote that the name symbolized the totality of the papacy:
There is only one Peter, the first of the Roman pontiffs, and he was seen in his many successors. He still to serve in the final as in the first persecution. We believe Petrus Romanus represents all the Roman Pontiffs from St. Peter to the recipient Gloria Olivae.[2]
In Thibaut’s reckoning all the ambitions and pretensions of the papal dynasty are now encompassed in one man. Paramount is the fact that he is the first ever Jesuit pope. This has great prophetic significance as the Jesuit order was formed to specifically to combat the protestant reformation and assert papal supremacy over the entire world. According to a historian, “The Jesuits were the soldiers of the pope: they knew no law but the will of their general, no mode of worship but the pope’s dictate no church but themselves.” [3] Because of this, the Jesuit order was suppressed and disbanded for its pernicious skullduggery by Pope Clement XIV in 1773 and by the mid-eighteenth century, the Jesuits had earned a bad reputation in Europe for political maneuvering and economic exploitation bar none. Interestingly, Pope Benedict XVI addressed the Jesuit order in 2008 encouraging them reinvigorate the fourth vow. He said,
For this very reason I have invited you and also invite you today to reflect in order to rediscover the fullest meaning of your characteristic “fourth vow” of obedience to the Successor of Peter, …[4]
The fourth vow of obedience to the pope is one of “absolute subservience to the pope; to do whatever he enjoined, and go on any service he wished, and into any quarter of the globe.”[5] A few ex-Jesuits have called this a blood oath involving pagan rites which were laid bare in the suppressed document “Jesuit Extreme Oath of Induction” which was recorded in records of the U.S. Congress. According to this document, they are indoctrinated into the principle of IUSTUM, NECAR, REGES, IMPIOUS:
When a Jesuit of the minor rank is to be elevated to command, he is conducted into the Chapel of the Convent of the Order, where there are only three others present, the principal or Superior standing in front of the altar. On either side stands a monk, one of whom holds a banner of yellow and white, which are the Papal colours, and the other a black banner with a dagger and red cross above a skull and crossbones, with the word INRI, and below them the words IUSTUM NECAR REGES IMPIUS. The meaning of which is: It is just to exterminate or annihilate impious or heretical Kings, Governments, or Rulers.[6]
While modernists surely prefer more subtle methods, we address the Jesuit’s who make up the Vatican Observatory Research Group in some detail in our new book Exo-Vaticana and offer some surprising revelations as to what might entice the entire world to unite under the new pontiff. Even so, other researchers document an ongoing militaristic campaign:
Today the Jesuit Order has about 19.000 members. Of the about 13.500 priest members, some have taken the 4th vow secret oath in which killing a heretic is not considered a crime. The ranks of Jesuits are thinning; From 36,000 members at the order’s zenith in the mid-1960s, to 26,000 in 1983, to 23,000 in 1995 [10]. The Jesuits are geographically organized by 91 provinces (61?), which each belong to one of 10 assistances around the world.
The Military Order of Malta has about 12.500 members (excluding volunteers), and Opus Dei has about 26,000 celibate members (excluding volunteers).
The Vatican-Jesuit-Masonic crusades, up to our present time, show their criminal “full-spectrum dominance” doctrine is effectuated all over the world by:
War, genocide and depopulation (recent examples: Canadian natives genocide between 1880-1984, the “Vatican managed Serbian genocide during WWII” with an ongoing US court case, and the ongoing Shia Muslim genocide in Iraq with over 1.217.892 deaths)
Political subversions
Economic slavery
Poor quality nutrition, healthcare and housing
Government propaganda (via education, media, science, and religion)
Suppression of sovereignty, consciousness and spirituality. [7]
In Petrus Romanus we stated our belief that the name “Peter the Roman” implies this pope “will reaffirm the authority of the Roman Pontiff over the Church” and “will emphasize the supremacy of the Roman Catholic Faith and the Roman Catholic Church above all other religions and denominations, and its authority over all Christians and all peoples of the world.”[8] This seems in line with the Jesuit agenda. Still more, Catholic mystic Ronald L. Conte Jr., who predicted in 2002 that the successor to John Paul II would choose the name Benedict XVI, commented on 3-13-13:
I never expected Peter the Roman to be Italian or Roman or to have the first name Peter, or to take the papal name “Peter”. So these points do not imply that Pope Francis is not Peter the Roman. The prophetic phrases of St. Malachy describe the Pontificate of each Pope, not his name.[9]
According to Conte, “During the reign of Pope Peter the Roman, the great apostasy begins” and this pope will mark “the first part of the tribulation, during our generation.”[10]
The media and Catholic faithful have been celebrating his choice of the papal name Francis, which is a first, and most folks assume it is inspired by St. Francis of Assisi. Interestingly, in Petrus Romanus we wrote of an apocalyptic prophecy given by the alleged namesake:
Even Saint Francis of Assisi-one of the most venerated religious figures in history-gathered his devotees shortly before his death and prophesied that: “At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavor to draw many into error and death… Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it…for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor, but a destroyer.”[11]
Was there something uncannonical about the election of Pope Francis I? It seems arguable. For starters, Pope Benedict XVI simply retiring makes for an unprecedented situation. Next, the fifteen day rule between the vacancy of the office and the start of the conclave was circumvented in order to speed up the process. The two living popes situation alone supports a charge of one “not canonically elected” but more mysteriously, there seems to be something fishy going on with his heraldry. According to one expert, “As can be seen on the coat of arms, he was not a bishop, despite being cardinal.”[12] This was Cardinal Bergoglio’s coat of arms as of 2010:
It uses the Jesuit Solar deity symbol, The Jesuits maintain that IHS stands for first three letters of the Greek name of Jesus, iota-eta-sigma but if so the name is Ἰησοuς so why not use the Greek letters Ι Η Σ ? Alternately, while it seems fanciful, some occult researchers claim it really means: Isis, Horace, Set:
Yet by Roman Catholic heraldic standards all bishops are required to include the archiepiscopal cross as well.
However, even though his coat of arms (dated 2001) lacked the required cross, we know that he was in fact a bishop prior to 2001. Bergoglio was named Auxiliary Bishop of Buenos Aires in 1992 and was ordained on 27 June 1992 as Titular Bishop of Auca.[13] This is extremely odd and has prompted heraldic specialists to assert ineptitude on the part of its designer.[14] It suggests something is amiss. Could the strange rule bending circumstances surrounding Pope Benedict XVI’s retirement suggest he is the uncannonical pope that St. Francis prophesied? (it looks the this malformed coat of arms has been quickly revised, so copy those images for safekeeping).
Wikipedia now has a corrected version:
Apocalyptic Franciscan prophecies and heraldic guffaws aside, many have overlooked another Catholic Saint he could have drawn the papal name from: St. Francis Xavier, a fellow Jesuit infamous for inspiring the Goa inquisition. This extended the European inquisition to the Indian state of Goa and the Portuguese empire in Asia, a repugnant affair in which some 16,202 persons were brought to trial resulting in untold numbers of executions by burning at the stake amongst lesser tortures.[15]
While we don’t normally put a lot of stock in numerology, the great biblical scholar and Anglican theologian E.W. Bullinger wrote an exhaustive treatise in the 19th century which has yielded some interesting connections to the new Pontiff. The numbers surrounding Pope Francis’ election keep coming up thirteen. White smoke at 7:06 PM which in numerology 7 + 6 = 13 and he is 76 years old 7 + 6 = 13 and then he was elected on the calendar date 3/13/13 which sports two 13s of its own but in numerology 3/13/2013 also yields 3+1+3+2+0+1+3=13 and he was announced at precisely 8:13 PM Vatican time or in military and European time 20:13 making for 3/13/2013 at 20:13. According to Bullinger:
As to the significance of thirteen, all are aware that it has come down to us as a number of ill-omen. Many superstitions cluster around it, and various explanations are current concerning them.
Unfortunately, those who go backwards to find a reason seldom go back far enough. The popular explanations do not, so far as we are aware, go further back than the Apostles. But we must go back to the first occurrence of the number thirteen in order to discover the key to its significance. It occurs first in Genesis 14:4, where we read “Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer, and the thirteenth year they REBELLED.”
Hence every occurrence of the number thirteen, and likewise of every multiple of it, stamps that with which it stands in connection with rebellion, apostasy, defection, corruption, disintegration, revolution, or some kindred idea.[16]
This ill omen suggests the “many tribulations” of the Malachy prophecy could coincide with the apostasy of 2 Thes. 2:3 ensue but Bullinger goes on to cite an exhaustive list of thirteen’s and factors of thirteen including examples like:
Satan, in Hebrew = 364 (13 x 28)   שָׂטָן
Satan, in Greek = 2197 (133) “That old serpent, even Satan” (ὁ ὄφις ὁ ἀρχαiος… καὶ ὁ Σατανaς) 2756 (13 x 212)
“According to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air” = 9178181 (13 x 706)
“The power of the air” = 2600 (13 x 200) [17]
While we could go on and on (Bullinger does) with a long list of similar demonic thirteens, one verse in particular is pertinent:
Revelation 13:11, The whole verse = 6318 (13×486)
θηρίον (theerion), beast = 247 (13×19)
ἅλλο θηρίον (hallo theerion), another beast = 378 (9×42)
“He had two horns” = 1521 (132×9)
“And he had two horns like a lamb” = 2704 (132×16) [18]
“And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.” (Revelation 13:11, AV)
Do all of these thirteen’s add up to a coincidence? That’s up to you decide. But the biblical prophecy alone points toward the papacy. Indeed this second beast is predicted to be viewed “like a lamb” and the accolades expressed on 3/13/2013 at 20:13 support that perception. This probably seems mean spirited to some but as protestants we feel well within our rights to assert that all claimants to Vicar “instead “of Christ as false prophets.[19] However, if the predictions of St. Francis of Assisi and St. Malachy are truly at their culmination, then the second beast, the one from the earth, who is called the “false prophet” (Rev. 16:13; 19:20; 20:10) or Petrus Romanus who will lead the world to worship the dragon, has arrived in Pope Francis but I am not a prophet… only time will tell.
[2] [2] René Thibaut, La Mystérieuse Prophétie des Papes (Paris: J. Vrin, 1951),25.
[3] W.C. Brownlee, Secret instructions of the Jesuits (1857) 7. http://archive.org/stream/instructiosecret00browrich#page/7/
[5]W.C. Brownlee, Secret instructions of the Jesuits (1857), 6 http://archive.org/stream/instructiosecret00browrich#page/6/
[6] Journals of the 62nd Congress, 3rd Session, of the United States Congressional Record (House Calendar No. 397, Report No. 1523, 15 February, 1913, pp. 3215-3216) text availablehttp://www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=jesuit
[8] Petrus Romanus, 437-438.
[10] Ibid.
[15] Salomon, H. P. and Sassoon, I. S. D., in Saraiva, Antonio Jose. The Marrano Factory. The Portuguese Inquisition and Its New Christians, 1536-1765 (Brill, 2001), pp. 345-7. Also see:http://www.rediff.com/news/2005/sep/14inter1.htm
[16]Ethelbert W. Bullinger, Number in Scripture (Pleasant Places Press, 2004; 2004), 208.
[17] Bullinger, Number in Scripture, 219.
[18] Bullinger, Number in Scripture, 225.
[19] This authoritatively explains why all Popes are false prophets: John MacArthur, “The Pope and the Papacy,” http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-291/the-pope-and-the-papacy
 

EXPOSING THE HERESIES OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH: MARY WORSHIP

by John MacArthur
After his prophetic vision of the eternal glories of heaven at the end of the book of Revelation, the apostle John described how he was overwhelmed by what he’d seen.
And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed me these things. But he said to me, “Do not do that. I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book. Worship God.” (Revelation22:8-9)
The Roman Catholic Church has committed the same error as John, promoting a mere citizen of heaven to an improper place of authority and honor. Despite the overwhelming testimony of Scripture, the Catholic Church has elevated Mary—a self-described servant of the Lord (Luke 1:38)—to the same level as God, if not higher.
In his Ineffabilis Deus in 1854, Pope Pius IX established as dogma the immaculate conception of Mary, which preserved her from inheriting original sin. His concluding statements provide a good summary of the Catholic view of Mary.
Let all the children of the Catholic Church, who are so very dear to us, hear these words of ours. With a still more ardent zeal for piety, religion and love, let them continue to venerate, invoke and pray to the most Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, conceived without original sin. Let them fly with utter confidence to this most sweet Mother of mercy and grace in all dangers, difficulties, needs, doubts and fears. Under her guidance, under her patronage, under her kindness and protection, nothing is to be feared; nothing is hopeless. Because, while bearing toward us a truly motherly affection and having in her care the work of our salvation, she is solicitous about the whole human race. And since she has been appointed by God to be the Queen of heaven and earth, and is exalted above all the choirs of angels and saints, and even stands at the right hand of her only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, she presents our petitions in a most efficacious manner. What she asks, she obtains. Her pleas can never be unheard.
Those words are echoed and expanded on throughout Roman Catholic history. Tradition dictates that Mary is part of the monarchy of heaven, soliciting grace and mercy from the Lord on behalf of sinners, and covering sin by distributing from her Treasury of Merit. She became a co-redeemer with Christ in His suffering on the cross, and is now a co-mediator alongside Him in heaven—essentially an alternative avenue of access to God. She replaces the Holy Spirit in bestowing aid and comfort to believers. In effect, she becomes an additional member of the Trinity.
That blasphemy stands in sharp contrast to what Scripture actually says about Mary, and even what she says about herself. Luke 1:46-55 records her humble reaction to the news that she would give birth to the Son of God.
And Mary said: “My soul exalts the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior. For He has had regard for the humble state of His bondslave; for behold, from this time on all generations will count me blessed. For the Mighty One has done great things for me; and holy is His name. And His mercy is upon generation after generation toward those who fear Him. He has done mighty deeds with His arm; He has scattered those who were proud in the thoughts of their heart. He has brought down rulers from their thrones, and has exalted those who were humble. He has filled the hungry with good things; and sent away the rich empty-handed. He has given help to Israel His servant, in remembrance of His mercy, as He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and his descendants forever.”
The God she praised—the God of the Bible—does not need to be coaxed or wooed to distribute His blessings. He’s not harsh, distant, or indifferent—He’s gracious, righteous, and merciful. Rather than glorifying herself, she humbly worshiped the Lord.
Scripture actually has very little to say about Mary. There’s no description of her physical appearance, nothing about her life, her later years after Christ’s death, or her own death and burial. And when she does briefly appear with the disciples and the other believers on the day of Pentecost, she’s not an object of worship or even a leader in the early church—she’s just one among many. There simply are no biblical examples of anyone ever praying to her, honoring her, or venerating her.
Nor does she play a role in any biblical explanation of the gospel. Paul wrote a magnificent treatise on the doctrine of salvation that we know as the book of Romans, and all he said about the mother of Jesus is that she was “a descendent of David” (Romans 1:3). He’s even less specific in Galatians, another lengthy exposition of the pure, true gospel in which he simply said that Christ was “born of a woman” (Galatians 4:4).
Contrast that with the unending Catholic volumes on the life of Mary, the miracles of Mary, the death of Mary, the apparitions of Mary, and on and on it goes. That’s why it’s often a shock for Catholics to read the Bible and see how little is actually said about Mary.
But that’s what happens when you elevate tradition to the level of Scripture and ascribe to men the infallible characteristics that only belong to God. It warps the truth of Scripture and distorts the Person and work of Jesus Christ.
God alone is our Redeemer, our Deliverer, our Benefactor, and our Comforter. He alone is to be worshiped, venerated, adored, and petitioned. The testimony of Scripture is clear.
Gather yourselves and come; draw near together, you fugitives of the nations; they have no knowledge, who carry about their wooden idol and pray to a god who cannot save. Declare and set forth your case; indeed, let them consult together. Who has announced this from of old? Who has long since declared it? Is it not I, the Lord? And there is no other God besides Me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none except Me. Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other. (Isaiah45:20-22)
 

EXPOSING THE HERESIES OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH: THE POPE

by John MacArthur
One of the major, early catalysts in the Protestant Reformation was a book by Jan Hus, a Bohemian Christian who preceded Martin Luther by a full century. The book was De Ecclesia (The Church), and one of Hus’s most profound points was proclaimed in the title of his fourth chapter: “Christ the Only Head of the Church.”
Hus wrote, “Neither is the pope the head nor are the cardinals the whole body of the holy, universal, catholic [i.e., true] church. For Christ alone is the head of that church.” Pointing out that most church leaders in his era actually despised the lordship of Christ, Hus said, “To such a low pitch is the clergy come that they hate those who preach often and call Jesus Christ Lord.”
Hus’s candor cost him his life. He was declared a heretic and burned at the stake in 1415.
More than a hundred years later, and already at odds with the papal establishment, Martin Luther read De Ecclesia. After finishing the book, he wrote to a friend, “I have hitherto taught and held all the opinions of Jan Hus unawares; so did John Staupitz. In short, we are all Hussites without knowing it.”
As the head of the Roman Catholic Church, the pope is often called the “Holy Father” and the “Vicar of Christ”—names and roles that only apply to God. He claims the ability to speak ex cathedra, exercising Godlike infallibility to add to and augment Scripture (Revelation 22:18). He wields unbiblical, unholy authority over his followers, usurping the headship of Christ and perverting the work of the Holy Spirit.
The Reformers understood that and declared it with unashamed boldness. As Martin Luther wrote to a friend, “We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist. . . . Personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to Antichrist.”
In his Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin said:
Some persons think us too severe and censorious, when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak, and whose language we adopt. And lest anyone should object, that we improperly pervert to the Roman pontiff those words of Paul, which belong to a different subject, I shall briefly show that they are not capable of any other interpretation than that which implies them to the papacy (John Allen’s translation, book four, chapter seven).
The words of Paul that Calvin referred to were from 2 Thessalonians, where the apostle described the coming Antichrist “who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God” (2 Thessalonians 2:4).
That same understanding was later reflected in the Westminster Confession of Faith, which says, “There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalts himself in the church against Christ and all that is called God” (25.6).
That doesn’t mean that the pope is the final Antichrist. There have been and will continue to be, as 1 John 2:18says, many false teachers who embody the spirit of Antichrist. As the American Puritan Cotton Mather wrote inThe Fall of Babylon, “The oracles of God foretold the rising of an Antichrist [i.e., one or more antichrists who embody the spirit of the final Antichrist] in the Christian church. And in the Pope of Rome, all the characteristics of that Antichrist are so marvelously answered that if any who read the Scriptures do not see it, there is a marvelous blindness on them.”
In a sermon titled “Pray for Jesus,” Charles Haddon Spurgeon exhorted his congregation that “it is the duty of every Christian to pray against Antichrist, and as to what Antichrist is. No sane man ought to raise a question. If it be not the popery in the church of Rome and in the church of England, there is nothing in the world that can be called by that name.”
He went on to say:
Popery anywhere, whether it be Anglican or Romish, is contrary to Christ’s gospel! And it is the Antichrist, and we ought to pray against it! It should be the daily prayer of every believer that Antichrist might be hurled like a millstone into the flood and sink to rise no more. If we can pray against error for Christ because it wounds Christ, because it robs Christ of His glory, because it puts sacramental efficacy in the place of His atonement and lifts a piece of bread into the place of the Savior, and a few drops of water into the place of the Holy Spirit, and puts a mere fallible man like ourselves up as the Vicar of Christ on earth—if we pray against it because it is against Him—we shall love the persons though we hate their errors! We shall love their souls though we loathe and detest their dogmas, and so the breath of our prayers will be sweetened because we turn our faces toward Christ when we pray.
In another sermon, titled “Christ Glorified,” Spurgeon said:
Christ did not redeem His church with His blood so the pope could come in and steal away the glory. He never came from heaven to earth and poured out His very heart that He might purchase His people so that a poor sinner, a mere man, should be set upon high to be admired by all the nations and to call himself God’s representative on earth! Christ has always been the head of His church.
In 1 Timothy 2:5, Paul said, “For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” The pope has assumed for himself a position of authority that does not need to be filled.
 

EXPOSING THE HERESIES OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH: GRACE VS WORKS

by John MacArthur
The New Testament is clear about the nature of saving faith. “For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law” (Romans 3:28). “A man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus . . . since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified” (Galatians 2:16). “But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:4-5).
According to Scripture, salvation is by faith in Christ alone through God’s grace alone. When you put your trust in Jesus Christ He declares you righteous—not because you are, but because He imputes His righteousness to you, and because He paid the penalty for your sin. Christ bears our sin and we receive His righteousness. That is the indescribable glory of the doctrine of justification (2 Corinthians 5:21).
The teaching of the Roman Catholic Church stands in stark opposition to that biblical understanding. Rather than salvation by grace through faith, they preach a false gospel of works.
The words of the Council of Trent—convened to affirm and codify the teaching of the Catholic Church in response to the Reformation—clearly spell out the Catholic version of justification that still stands today. “Hence, to those who work well unto the end and trust in God, eternal life is to be offered, both as a grace mercifully promised to the sons of God through Christ Jesus, and as a reward promised by God himself, to be faithfully given to their good works and merits.” Salvation in the Catholic system is something you earn “by those very works which have been done in God, fully satisfied the divine law according to the state of this life and to have truly merited eternal life.”
That is an absolute and total contradiction of the Word of God. It’s a completely foreign gospel, manufactured by the Catholic Church and able only to condemn, not save. No amount of repetitious prayers, veneration of the saints and other church relics, or masses attended can redeem a sinner’s soul. No priest has the power to forgive sins, and no indulgence bought and paid for can hold back the due punishment of those sins.
At the heart of the merit-based Catholic system is the unbiblical concept of purgatory. In fact, it’s the invention of purgatory that makes Catholic dogma attractive at all—without it, Catholicism would be a very hard sell. Catholics are never really on solid spiritual ground. They can’t know for certain if they’re saved or whether they will ever make it into heaven. And even confident, pious Catholics live in perpetual fear of committing a mortal sin that will throw them out of favor with God and the church.
It’s the false doctrine of purgatory that provides Catholics their spiritual safety net, bringing false hope to people trapped in a hopeless system. It’s the one relief in their entire guilt-ridden, fear-ridden system of works righteousness. And it is complete fiction—a tragic farce that’s led countless souls to hell.
The apostle Paul could not have been clearer about the true nature of justification: “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9). That gracious, glorious gospel has been rejected by the Catholic Church, and they have replaced it with a corrupt, unbiblical system of works righteousness and merit-based salvation.
Presiding over that twisted system of satanic lies is the pope. And that is where we’ll pick it up tomorrow.
For more, click here