The Pope is not the Anti-Christ...

#76
#76
For the edification of all:

Critical analysis makes it difficult to accept the idea that the gospel as it now stands was written by one person. John 21 seems to have been added after the gospel was completed; it exhibits a Greek style somewhat different from that of the rest of the work. The prologue (John 1:1-18) apparently contains an independent hymn, subsequently adapted to serve as a preface to the gospel. Within the gospel itself there are also some inconsistencies, e.g., there are two endings of Jesus' discourse in the upper room (John 14:31; 18:1). To solve these problems, scholars have proposed various rearrangements that would produce a smoother order. However, most have come to the conclusion that the inconsistencies were probably produced by subsequent editing in which homogeneous materials were added to a shorter original.
Other difficulties for any theory of eyewitness authorship of the gospel in its present form are presented by its highly developed theology and by certain elements of its literary style. For instance, some of the wondrous deeds of Jesus have been worked into highly effective dramatic scenes (John 9); there has been a careful attempt to have these followed by discourses that explain them (John 5; 6); and the sayings of Jesus have been woven into long discourses of a quasi-poetic form resembling the speeches of personified Wisdom in the Old Testament.
The gospel contains many details about Jesus not found in the synoptic gospels, e.g., that Jesus engaged in a baptizing ministry (John 3:22) before he changed to one of preaching and signs; that Jesus' public ministry lasted for several years (see the note on John 2:13); that he traveled to Jerusalem for various festivals and met serious opposition long before his death (John 2:14-25; 5; 7-8); and that he was put to death on the day before Passover (John l8:28). These events are not always in chronological order because of the development and editing that took place. However, the accuracy of much of the detail of the fourth gospel constitutes a strong argument that the Johannine tradition rests upon the testimony of an eyewitness. Although tradition identified this person as John, the son of Zebedee, most modern scholars find that the evidence does not support this.
The fourth gospel is not simply history; the narrative has been organized and adapted to serve the evangelist's theological purposes as well. Among them are the opposition to the synagogue of the day and to John the Baptist's followers, who tried to exalt their master at Jesus' expense, the desire to show that Jesus was the Messiah, and the desire to convince Christians that their religious belief and practice must be rooted in Jesus. Such theological purposes have impelled the evangelist to emphasize motifs that were not so clear in the synoptic account of Jesus' ministry, e.g., the explicit emphasis on his divinity.
The polemic between synagogue and church produced bitter and harsh invective, especially regarding the hostility toward Jesus of the authorities--Pharisees and Sadducees--who are combined and referred to frequently as "the Jews" (see the note on John 1:19). These opponents are even described in John 8:44 as springing from their father the devil, whose conduct they imitate in opposing God by rejecting Jesus, whom God has sent. On the other hand, the author of this gospel seems to take pains to show that women are not inferior to men in the Christian community: the woman at the well in Samaria (John 4) is presented as a prototype of a missionary (John 4:4-42), and the first witness of the resurrection is a woman (John 20:11-18).
The final editing of the gospel and arrangement in its present form probably dates from between A.D. 90 and 100. Traditionally, Ephesus has been favored as the place of composition, though many support a location in Syria, perhaps the city of Antioch, while some have suggested other places, including Alexandria.
The principal divisions of the Gospel according to John are the following:

http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/john/intro.htm
Click to expand...

That is from Roman Catholic Canon; not "New Advent", which is an unofficial Roman Catholic Website.
 
#77
#77
1 John
Chapter 41 1 Beloved, do not trust every spirit but test the spirits to see whether they belong to God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 This is how you can know the Spirit of God: every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh be longs to God, 3 and every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus 2 does not belong to God. This is the spirit of the antichrist that, as you heard, is to come, but in fact is already in the world. 4 You belong to God, children, and you have conquered them, for the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. 5 They belong to the world; accordingly, their teaching belongs to the world, and the world listens to them. 6 We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit. 7 3 Beloved, let us love one another, because love is of God; everyone who loves is begotten by God and knows God. 8 Whoever is without love does not know God, for God is love. 9 In this way the love of God was revealed to us: God sent his only Son into the world so that we might have life through him. 10 In this is love: not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as expiation for our sins. 11 Beloved, if God so loved us, we also must love one another. 12 No one has ever seen God. Yet, if we love one another, God remains in us, and his love is brought to perfection in us. 13 4 This is how we know that we remain in him and he in us, that he has given us of his Spirit. 14 Moreover, we have seen and testify that the Father sent his Son as savior of the world. 15 Whoever acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God, God remains in him and he in God. 16 We have come to know and to believe in the love God has for us. God is love, and whoever remains in love remains in God and God in him. 17 In this is love brought to perfection among us, that we have confidence on the day of judgment because as he is, so are we in this world. 18 There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear because fear has to do with punishment, and so one who fears is not yet perfect in love. 19 We love because he first loved us. 20 If anyone says, "I love God," but hates his brother, he is a liar; for whoever does not love a brother whom he has seen cannot love God 5 whom he has not seen. 21 This is the commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother.
Click to expand...

Does the Catholic Church fail to acknowledge Jesus as one of the three persons of God?
 
#78
#78
1 1 The Presbyter to the chosen Lady and to her children whom I love in truth--and not only I but also all who know the truth-- 2 because of the truth that dwells in us and will be with us forever. 3 Grace, mercy, and peace 2 will be with us from God the Father and from Jesus Christ the Father's Son in truth and love. 4 I rejoiced greatly to find some of your children 3 walking in the truth just as we were commanded by the Father. 5 But now, Lady, I ask you, not as though I were writing a new commandment but the one we have had from the beginning: let us love one another. 6 For this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; 4 this is the commandment, as you heard from the beginning, in which you should walk. 7 Many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh; such is the deceitful one and the antichrist. 5 8 Look to yourselves that you 6 do not lose what we worked for but may receive a full recompense. 9 Anyone who is so "progressive" 7 as not to remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God; whoever remains in the teaching has the Father and the Son. 10 8 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him in your house or even greet him; 11 for whoever greets him shares in his evil works. 12 9 Although I have much to write to you, I do not intend to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and to speak face to face so that our joy may be complete. 13 The children of your chosen sister 10 send you greetings.
Click to expand...

Again, does the Roman Catholic Church fail to acknowledge Jesus as one of the three persons in God? Does it fail to bring this doctrine to others?
 
#79
#79
therealUT said:
Again, does the Roman Catholic Church fail to acknowledge Jesus as one of the three persons in God? Does it fail to bring this doctrine to others?
Click to expand...

I've never made that point. You had said that doctrinally opposing and labelling as the antichrist were fundamentally different, and I simply referenced those passages as examples of that very thing. I also mentioned that I disagree with the Reformers on that point, even if I am sympathetic to their argument.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#80
#80
hallowed_hill said:
I've never made that point. You had said that doctrinally opposing and labelling as the antichrist were fundamentally different, and I simply referenced those passages as examples of that very thing. I also mentioned that I disagree with the Reformers on that point, even if I am sympathetic to their argument.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

It is not the same thing. First, it is "this doctrine" not some general "any doctrine": doctrinal opposition to the acknowledgement of Christ means that one would be labeled an antichrist through the Johanine texts (and, only the Johanine texts, as the Synoptic Gospels, the Pauline Epistles, and the Petrine Epistles make concessions for non-believers); doctrinal opposition regarding any other doctrines does not make one an antichrist, according to the Johanine texts.

Therefore, one can oppose doctrine and be fine; the fundamental issue is the acknowledgement of Jesus as the Christ. This is not so much a point of doctrine as it is Dogmatic Faith. Doctrines can be changed without having a substantial affect on the fundamental and overriding beliefs; Dogma cannot.

I think it would be best for any and all who feel in anyway sympathetic to an interpretation of Scripture or a labeling of the Catholic Church that says such a Church is the antichrist should be well versed in what is and isn't Catholic Doctrine, Dogma, and Canon. As well, they should be well versed in where the authority of scripture stems from, what each book says locally, what global inconsistencies arrise, and then what the overriding method and theme of the Bible are. I will state, categorically, that the Catholic Church places much more relevance, importance, and authority in what is said in the Synoptic Gospels, the Petrine Epistles, and the Letter of James, than in what is preached, and preached in a highly poetic and rhetorical manner, in the Johanine texts.
 
#82
#82
therealUT said:
You expect the Pope to hate Lutherans? Your expectations are pretty far from reality. In fact, the Catholic Church recognizes any Trinitarian Baptism and any Trinitarian Marriage; the same can rarely be said of Protestant sects.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

My post was not intended to be taken literally. I apologize for any pain this my have caused my Catholic brethren. I could care less about who or what the Pope loves.
 
#83
#83
Lex, let's hear you say that when the Pope is shooting lightning bolts at you from his palms...
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#85
#85
IPorange said:
Ironic, that you are complaining about your SOP.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

That could easily be your opinion since I don't roll over for you. It is tempting to assign the same to you. I am confident but not closed minded. I explain things sometimes ad nauseum in an effort to explain that confidence.

I do not recall mocking you or using tactics intended to cut off debate while I declare myself winner. If I have... then sincerely I apologize. Please point it out if I do it again.
 
Last edited:
#86
#86
VOLatile said:
Sjt - skeptical of math and science, Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Nope. Skeptic of those who either knowingly or blindly accept philosophical presuppositions that preclude possibilities simply because they do not like them... not because they disagree with math or science.
 
#88
#88
sjt18 said:
Nope. Skeptic of those who either knowingly or blindly accept philosophical presuppositions that preclude possibilities simply because they do not like them... not because they disagree with math or science.
Click to expand...

this describes both sides. you know that, right?

I have a hard time swallowing a grand story about someone who cured illness with magic and fermented alcohol in water with a wave of his hand. Am I just being indoctrinated by society?
 
#89
#89
therealUT said:
I understand the concepts of good and evil. I understand the Christian connotation of "Anti-Christ" is meant to mean the physical, human embodiment of pure evil. I think it is outlandish to label the Catholic Church, the Pope, and/or the Papacy as "pure evil".

I also find it interesting that what her Church states what that they are fundamentally opposed to in Catholic Doctrine is not a part of Catholic Doctrine.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I would not think that you would find the belief that the CC is the Anti Christ as odd by certain denominations as well versed as you are in religious studies.

As I sure you are aware, many will use Revelation 17 to make that argument.
 
#92
#92
KiffinKiller said:
this describes both sides. you know that, right?
Click to expand...
Yes. In my experience, few people of any stripe really spend alot of time thinking about why they believe what they believe.

I do not agree with IPOrange and argue with him fairly often. But he seems to have gone pretty deep in thinking through his position.

I have a hard time swallowing a grand story about someone who cured illness with magic and fermented alcohol in water with a wave of his hand. Am I just being indoctrinated by society?
Click to expand...

Maybe. Maybe someone you trusted? Maybe something else that causes a bias against belief in the supernatural. But whether you have thought about it or not, that conclusion is ultimately based on presuppositions about reality that you cannot prove nor can anyone else disprove them. We're all in that same boat.

Basically, there are 3 starting points- only the material is real, only the spiritual is real, or both material and spiritual are real. You've either thoughtfully accepted one of these starting points by "faith" or else been "indoctrinated" into a paradigm with one of these as a premise without being conscious of it.

The conclusions we draw will ultimately be limited by whichever one we choose. The supernatural position (both are real) actually allows the most range with regard to what ideas can be accepted or incorporated. If you start from that premise then you are forced to neither accept nor reject miracle claims. You can allow the proof to lead you or with equal freedom accept it on "faith".
 
#94
#94
KiffinKiller said:
My beliefs are my own. FWIW im not atheist - just don't believe in 'jesus' the man.
Click to expand...


How about 'jesus' the squid?

squids_ep015_08.jpg
 
#97
#97
OJ said:
so you don't believe anything about Jesus that's in the bible?
Click to expand...

I think he just said that. Allegorically, one could look at Jesus as a fictional-personal representation of the word of God; this word, that had been so harsh and strict, was then killed (abandoned) and resurrected less as a strict set of rules and punishments and more as a guiding principle (do the right thing to others, the right thing is what your conscience, the IIHS, tells you to do) and will one day return with a new set of rules, when the world has gone to SH*T and needs such rules.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#100
#100
OJ said:
No flame. Your not by yourself by no means. It was just, a lot of religions believe in Jesus " the man " but not about Jesus as God.
Click to expand...

A lot of religions? Christianity and Islam; Judaism cedes the possibility that a man named Jesus cul have existed and could have been crucified; Hinduism speaks nothing of the man; Shintoism, silence...
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top