16519Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Mark of the Number of the Name of the Beast video
- Oct 2, 2008Glenn Ferrell wrote:
> I’d be interested in arguments for why the 2 Thess. 2 is not referringNo, it's not. But it does refute what *some* maintain, that
> to the pope. Simply asserting scripture identifies other "antichrists"
> is not sufficient to refute what Westminster maintained.
"antichrist" may only properly refer to the Pope.
Properly read with the grammar of the day, the Westminster clause does
not identify the Pope as the only fulfillment of the prophecy, but only
as a (or even "the) prime example of the type.
Yes, the Pope is a prime example of Antichrist. But to say AntiChrist
can only mean the Pope is wrong.
I do believe that Scripture teaches that "the Man of Sin", the Beast,
666 was Nero, and that most of the prophecy in the Apocalypse of John
was fulfilled during 70 AD and the Jewish Wars. I do not believe that
makes me a papist or a heretic; and I do not agree that some sort of
burden of proof falls upon me to refute Westminster on that. What
exalts those men's opinions to that level of authority?
(Think carefully before answering)
What is the Scriptural proof for that authority?
I think it funny that people that deny 144 hour creation are often
allowed as orthodox by people who condemn partial preterists as heretics.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>