Bible Teaching aimed at helping you enjoy the Scriptures which are the Word of GOD!

Search BibleStudy.net


Bible Study Broadcast Info

Preaching by: John J. Malone, Sr - JABSBG*

Directory of Top Christian Podcasts
XML Sitemap

John 21, Peter, & the Pope - Comments (0)

Printer Friendly Category: Articles,Doctrine,Roman Catholicism
Author: John Malone
Date: 16th May, 2005 @ 11:34:48 AM

Papal Dress and Relics
“Wearing golden vestments and clutching his pastoral staff, Benedict began the ceremony by walking into the area under St. Peter’s Basilica where St. Peter is believed to be buried, paying homage to the first pope and blessing the tomb with incense as a choir chanted.”

Misusing the Memory of Peter
“In one of the most symbolic moments of the two-hour Mass, Benedict was given his Fisherman’s Ring and a woolen pallium or shawl — both symbols of his papal authority. The ring is emblazoned with an image of Peter casting his fishing nets and was traditionally used to seal apostolic letters.”

Associated Press, Sunday, April 24th
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

It’s likely I would never discuss the Pope if he did not claim to be Christian.

But the Papacy and Vatican is what it is – emblematic if not identical to the mother of all whores pictured in Revelation – because of those claims, and the disgusting and parading nonsense as described above.

In fact, when it comes to Rome itself – the so-called “eternal city” that sits on seven hills – The Roman Catholic Organization (RCO) has an interesting irony placed upon it. There is no Biblical evidence the apostle Peter was ever in Rome Historically, the passage that yields the conclusion is an intering one: Peter’s greetings from “Babylon” in his first epistle.

(The ONLY reason any Bible students think Peter may have been in Rome – let alone functioning as an elder there – is that “Babylon” may be “code” for Rome. I personally do not agree with that interpretation, holding instead that “Babylon” in 1 Peter means the literal city in what is now Iraq.)

But if Peter’s greeting DID encode Rome with the word “Babylon,” it would be Scriptural indicator that Rome is the subsequently prophesied mother whore. That she sits on seven mountains or hills (greek = “oro”) , and that Rome (among others cities, including: Jerusalem, Jericho, Babylon, Washington D.C, Istanbul, Lisbon, San Francisco, Rio de Janeiro, and Pretoria to name ten) is world famous as that very city is nearly indisputable.

But we are not prepared to declare the RCO as the full bloom of Revelation’s mother whore, but merely the nearest thing to it in mystery form during ths present dispensation. We suspect that a combined religious system featuring spiritism – and comprehending Islam, at least – will arise on the scene in conjunction with the polictical and economic system of the beast of Revelation.

Even those who hold that the beast of Revelation “that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns” is a latter times “revival” of the Roman Empire must take into account that the full bloom of that empire was not merely Western in scope, but became divided with a dual capital headquartered in Instanbul (see above). Therefore, in the time of the end, a factor must unify the breech now evident between a post-modern Christianized West, and an Islamic dominated Middle East.

Insofar as the “woman/whore” pictured in Revelation 17 “sits on many waters” – told to us to represent many people, nations and tongues – then we infer her to be an agent of assemblage: a packager together of disparate people. It was the Babylonian system of Nimrod that brought together all people against God through the invention of a religious system , thus making plausible his goal of a city, and a name, by bulding a tower that replaced the commands of God.

The RCO is historically world famous for it’s attempt to build the “City of God” on earth. In fact, the reason you will see the Pope have two fingers raised on his hand when he extends it is that one is for “spiritual authority” and the other is for “temporal authority.”

But for now, let me focus in on the two paragraphs above.

Popes have ever been known for their fine – if strange – raiment. Their “vestments” including the commonly seen mitre hats, and more uncommonly seen “triple crowns” are all targeted to cast a mysterious scene around the wearer in order to produce irregular high esteem. Of course NONE of this has any reference to the apostles, especially Peter.

After all, it was Peter, who, after he told the other apostles “I go a fishing” , when he knew the Lord Jesus to be on the shore, put on his fisher’s coat jumped into the sea, and swam to shore, having, of course, abandoned the ship and the fish.

No fine vestments and mitre hat there!

And the Apostle Paul, also establishing “apostolic tradition,” criticized the Corinthiam church for what must be considered a slight hint of “Papal behavior.” His strong criticism was that the Corinthians acted as if they were reigning in this world before the time of the Lord Jesus’ return, while the apostle’s were suffering the designated indignities classed as the sufferings for Christ.

Another feature of Papal behavior that is strangely hostile to Bible Christianity is the affinity to “holy places” and dead people. This affinity and practice is throughout all of Roman Catholicism, despite its antagonism to the Scriptures. It is a little known fact, for instance, that the heinous Roman Catholic Mass -itself a blasphemy of both the Person and work fo the Lord Jesus Christ – is performed on “altars” conatining relics of dead people classed as “saints” by the RCO.

Even the casual reader of the Bible can discern that Romanism is not Biblical Christianity.

Comment by Maxwell » 5th February, 2007 @ 05:25:58 PM

There may not be biblical proof that Peter was in Rome, but there is indeed historical proof that he was.

Ponder this selection from Irenaeus’ Adversus haereses (Against heresies). Irenaeus was a student of Polycarp who was a student of the Apostle John:

Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.

So not only is Irenaeus telling us that Peter founded the Church of Rome, but that every Church should be in harmony with the Church of Rome due to it’s [sic] preeminent authority.
==========================
John’s comment:

Here is an excellent example of why God breathed-out the Scriptures instead of leaving us at the mercies of the “historical proof” of men in their thoughts and writings.

Of course, Romanism designs to make every man dependent on them for the undertsanding of God’s Mind, having taken up Nimrod’s agenda at Babel.

So, they easily disregard the Scriptures, which have plenty to say about church governance, and which have NOTHING to say about one local church being told what to do by a “higher” or dominating church, and instead turn to some guy named “Iranaeus,” who is unnamed in Scripture, and about which we know almost nothing.

He is allegedly a student of another guy – “Polycarp” – who is also unknown in the Scripture, and too young to have been the disciple of John the Apostle, unless the latter lived to be 200. But Iranaeus wasn’t a very good student, apparently, because Polycarp readily ignored the bishops of Rome whereas Iranaeus demonstrates a cult-like following.

This reminds me of my archeological visit to the Mediterranean, where I visted, among other places, the island of Patmos. We were taken by our guide to “the cave of St. John” (for a fee), and I was asked to address a large group visiting there concerning the Biblical passages relating to John’s “imprisonment” on the island. I pointed out the Scriptures said nothing about John being imprisoned on the island, or jailed in a cave, and that frankly I doubted very seriously if we were standing somewhere where he once did, considering the odds.

It’s a nicely appointed cave these days, so we sang a hymn because the accoustics were interesting. There was a strange guy, said to be a Catholic monk, standing in the corner. I tried to talk to him for awhile, but it appeared that while lights were on, no one was home.

Back to Iranaeus. This is the same guy who gives an account of Peter and Simon Magus in Rome, the latter demonstrating the ability to fly while Peter and Paul allegedly knelt in prayer on a paved surface, miraculously impressing that surface with knee-formed dimples which later ended up – surprisingly – in a Catholic church building where people would visit to see them.

Of course, Simon Magus then crashed to the ground, injuring himself.

Remarkable stuff, this historical proof.

There’s a reason the Lord Jesus said “call no man on earth father,” and that includes “church fathers.” We know from the Bible that the mystery of inquity was already working during the time of the apostle Paul’s ministry. No surprise Iraneous was infected with wrong ecclesiology.

I’ll take the Scriptures.

No Comments » Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

  • There are some errors in your input.