The Pope as anti-Christ is biblical but not as you see it.
Matth. 16:23
He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do.”
It's fitting for judgement to begin with the Church.
Then I think what you said would be oral tradition.I think so
Peter is acting out Satan's desire at that moment. That door the Father opened in front of Peter. The door Peter had the keys to. Satan swooped through it to distort the meaning of the revelation to Peter.So you believe Peter antichrist?
Then I think what you said would be oral tradition.
Peter is acting out Satan's desire at that moment. That door the Father opened in front of Peter. The door Peter had the keys to. Satan swooped through it to distort the meaning of the revelation to Peter.
Jesus scared the devil right out of him.![]()
Ahhh ok. You made a statement that you claimed is impossible to be wrong. Now you say you don't have the authority to make that claim.I am not leader so I can't make law. Is what I say a law?
It is my opinion base on the Bible, I compare purgatory to the teaching of the Bible, and I found it is not in the gospel so catholic not Christian, bucause Christian base on Christ teaching
Peter was imposing his will. Peter's will is united to Satan's in that both willed Jesus to be a worldly King. Attempting to redirect Jesus's mission from it's heavenly purpose and make It worldly. Yes indeed that was a manifestation of antichrist.Make mistake doesn't mean antichrist. Antichrist is pope, want to replace Christ.
Quote
Antichrist is translated from the combination of two ancient Greek words αντί + Χριστός (anti + Christos). In Greek, Χριστός means "anointed one" and the word Christ derives from it.[6]"Αντί" means not only anti in the sense of "against" and "opposite of", but also "in place of".[7][8]
Also in place of Christ
https://radio7.interamerica.org/uploaded_assets/83592
This link tell some pope claim to be God on earth
Ahhh ok. You made a statement that you claimed is impossible to be wrong. Now you say you don't have the authority to make that claim.
Who does?
Peter was imposing his will. Peter's will is united to Satan's in that both willed Jesus to be a worldly King. Attempting to redirect Jesus's mission from it's heavenly purpose and make It worldly. Yes indeed that was a manifestation of antichrist.
Purgatory?For Catholics- it happens after death. For Protestants and in the Bible, it happens at the beginning, when God saves us!
"Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God." Romans 5:1-2
A catholic can never know if they are saved, until they have survived purgatory, a place that is never mentioned in the Bible.
Somebody does right?I can claim what ever I want but I don't have authority to make law
Do you deny that Peter is the only Apostle that had their name changed by God? No reason for that? What about Peter receiving Divine Revelation straight from the Father. There are many other ways the Gospels singles out Peter. That was for no reason? Wasted moves?Jesus don't want us commit adultery, if we do, is that mean we are antichrist?
1 Peter is not pope, so if Peter antichrist didn't mean pope antichrist
2. Peter never claim as god on earth
Wouldn't you think that the accusation of errant doctrine requires the time and the infamous doctrine as evidence? I mean the Eastern Orthodox pin it down like that. Time, place, doctrinal dispute everything. Its an extraordinary claim and requires evidence to match. What you have is misty and vague mounted on fantastic conspiracy for support. Just sayin'Anyway. Back to the OP. The oldest faith would be proto -Judaism as revealed to Adam and the patriarchs. The oldest Christian body would be the proto-orthodox as exemplified by the church in the book of Acts. This body became the church catholic (meaning universal, NOT Rome). Rome is indeed ancient, but not ancient enough and certainly not catholic. Rome was part of of the church catholic in the west but over time became heterodox. As to when? I’m not sure you can put a date on it. Error began creeping in very early especially once the church became the official religion of the Empire under Theodosious I. Writers at the time knew there were problems thats why you see the rise of monasticism in the fourth century.
I'm confused by the term 'proto-orthodox.' It seems an oxymoron to me. A straight teaching before a straight teaching.The oldest Christian body would be the proto-orthodox as exemplified by the church in the book of Acts.
Why do people attack Catholics as false, when we're the mutant spawn that arose from the original church? How does one reconcile their beliefs knowing that Catholicism came first?
Your faith comes as a schism of Lutheranism and not even the original Lutheranism (unless you are Lutheran) but the versions that broke off after Lutheranism, yet you claim superiority of your Christian faith over the original practices?
How exactly does that add up to truth? If you were born before Martin Luther, all there was was Catholicism so tell me exactly how is your faith superior to Catholicism? How are they not Christians?