Pope

Well, Jesus tried and did convert the Jews first and then moved on to the Gentiles. All of His disciples were converted Jews and it is letters written by Jews which we call the word of God.

Jesus told the Jews as well as us all that unless one is born again ( and that is receiving Jesus Christ) they cannot enter into the kingdom of Heaven.

This is why this pope was actually one of the worse popes ever as far as preaching the gospel goes. In fact, have you heard even one spokes person or media head saying how this pope reached thousands of lost people for Jesus Christ?

I haven't heard it once! Unless his messages begin with you must be born again to enter heaven, that you must be saved by Jesus Christ, that you must believe He is the Son of God otherwise you cannot enter into heaven, then all of the "do good" messages are worthless for the hearer.

Here is the "vicar" of Christ and he is not remembered at all for preaching Jesus Christ the only way to heaven! How sad is that? On the contrary, he is remembered for making every religion feel good about their beliefs like they carry some sort of approval in the sight of God!


from Rachel****---That is what I was wondering, and did he preach Jesus is the only way to Heaven or not??*****---


Catholics should ask themselves. Was this indeed a great pope? What did he do in this position to save souls? "Let's just all get along and do good" does not save souls and doing good and getting along may make life enjoyable on earth but what about the eternal cosequences?

This pope did nothing to aid Christ in growing the kingdom of God. Good deeds mean nothing without the foundational salvation which is found in Jesus Christ alone. Did he mention this to all of those religious leaders he met with over the years? The media sure doesn't remember any times if he ever did. All they remember is him preaching unity among religion, the very thing that Jesus was against!

I heard them say on tv that he is already being called John Paul the Great! That this is usually reserved for catholics who reach "sainthood" after death.

This is for the catholics who post here. Are you not already a saint if you are born again?

God Bless! </font>[/QUOTE]I would love to hear from some catholics about that, because I really don't know....

Rachel

 

Bob
You link quoted from the English translation of Vittorio Messori's Varcare la soglia della speranza*.
It's Vittorio the journalist your quoting not the pope.

"Confronted with the Pope, one must make a choice.
The leader of the Catholic Church is defined by the faith as the Vicar of Jesus Christ (and is accepted as such by believers). The Pope is considered the man on earth who represents the Son of God, who "takes the place" of the Second Person of the omnipotent God of the Trinity."

He contrasts this bit of sucking up to the pope with the fllowing.
"Nevertheless, according to many others, this is an absurd and unbelievable claim. The Pope, for them, is not God's representative. He is, instead, the surviving witness of ancient myths and legends that today the "adult" does not accept."


To quote the pope himself.

"With regard to the Church entrusted to him, each bishop is Vicarius Christi. The Pope is Vicar of Christ with regard to the Church of Rome and, through that Church, of every Church in communion with it. Thus, if with this title, one wants to refer to the dignity of the Bishop of Rome, one cannot consider it apart from the dignity of the entire college of bishops, with which it is tightly bound, as it is to the dignity of each bishop, each priest, and each of the baptised."
"
Ergo JPII claimed that each bishop on earth is a Vicarius Christi to his church (this includes those bishops of churches that are not in communion of Rome).


*Crossing the Threshold of Hope

 

Have any of you Jack Chick-ians ever considered that the guy was/is a rank bigot, and that any doctrine which considers Catholicism the handmaiden of the Antichrist misgt just be missing the historical significance of the city of Rome?

Rome was the political capital of the known world at the time of John's writing. The seat of absolute power and authority. Perhaps a more rational exegesis may include the notion that the description directs one to a place, not neccesarily the Rome of today, which is the center of political power and control.

IO'm still, by the way, trying to figure out why an African/black Pope would be such a huge scandal. Perhaps this simply would offer white Fundamentalists another reason to despise Catholicism... as if you need one.

 

First of all Mioque is to be congratulated for quoting something other than herself.

Now lets see what "really happened".

The book is in fact just "an interview" recorded. So the questions are as much a part of the book as the answers and the questions are "vetted" approved by the Church as much as the answers. The entire thing - is what is being promoted. They are not saying "here is an ignorant heteric journalst tripping up the Pope" as the preface to this.

Vittorio Messori is in fact stating Catholic context and basic beliefs - and then asking the Pope to comment on them. The Pope can at any time say -- "That is just not correct".

He does not.

So in THIS CHAPTER FROM THE BOOK that has been quoted -- what do we find?

Certainly a lot of error in text so far. Remember this IS the chapter it is not an introduction to the book itself. The book is nothing more than a transcribed interview.

So now the CHAPTER CONTINUES with John Paul's reply

 

It begins to take on more and more signifigance as we find out that almost all the heads of state from all over the world are coming to his funeral.

I believe that we will see, as time goes on, that this event is a turning point as far as the end times are concerned.


Peace.

Tam

 

So if you're wrong, we get to burn you at the stake as a false prophet, right?

 

Nope, ain't prophicyin', just thinking out loud. Never said I was prophet!!

But you gotta admit my teeth are white!!!(inside joke)

Peace,

Tam

 

"Thinking out loud" is a nice way to say you're looking to the RCC as the source of all things evil and incapable of producing any good thing.

Which, considering that Protestantism emerged from Catholicism, is instructive...

 

Well as Calvin, Luther and Wesley all concluded - the book of Revelation DOES point out the work of the RCC. Some of us are protestants in that regard.

Maybe Wesley was reading Jack Chick books!

Rome never achieved the global power that the RCC had AFTER the death of Christ - even the RCC admits that. IT was the NEXT great power to arise in the same territory as the former pagan Roman Empire.

The 4th beast of Daniel 7 is the pagan Roman Empire. It splits into 10 - and then the Papacy arises out of that - and persecutes the saints during the dark ages - a 1260 year reign of power by the Catholic Church.

Indeed it does - to Rome. And it does start out with the persecution OF the church by pagan Rome AFTER the resurrection of Christ in Rev 12.

But then it GOES on to a 1260 year period of persecution - the DARK AGES - the HUGE blot of time FAR surpassing ANYTHING the pagan Roman empire was ever capable of doing.

It's successor -- Papal Rome is well documented in BOTH Protestant AND Catholic histories that aLL show Papal Rome to have FAR SURPASSED pagan Rome's history -- during those 1260 years of Papal Rome's supremecy

See - History has actual "details" that need to be paid attention to instead of sweeping all of the dark ages into your blind spot.

In Christ,

Bob

 

MAYBE if I, too, type in CAPITAL letters I'll appear LEARNED.

SO, is the 1260 YEAR period the MILLENIA? OR is there SOME other EXPLANATION for the fact that Rome as a RELIGIOUS CENTER does NOT, in fact, carry the AUTHORITY neccessary to PRODUCE an Antichrist?

 

Bob
First of all your precious interview never actually took place. What happened was that RAI wanted to do a television interview between Wojtyla and Messori, but it never took place. However the pope thought the suggested questions were interesting so he wrote down his answers. The story is on the dustcover of every edition of the book.
Second I honestly see nothing more shocking than some very misplaced arrogance on the part of the RCC in the bits you quoted.
Yes I know, come into the light Mioque you infidel...

"It's successor -- Papal Rome is well documented in BOTH Protestant AND Catholic histories that aLL show Papal Rome to have FAR SURPASSED pagan Rome's history -- during those 1260 years of Papal Rome's supremecy"
"
Papal Rome, a kingdom covering the middle of Italy with a lot of influence in the rest of Western Europe, not even close to the pagan Roman Empire that completely controlled the entire Mediterranean.