The Lord's Day, is it really Sunday?

[coconut theology]

...The only power that fits all these scriptures in Daniel, Matthew and Revelation is the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. This is the true AntiChrist and the one who though to change times and law *DANIEL 7:25.

...

Hope this is helpful

Most helpful.

In fact, they have an entire counterfeit 'sanctuary' system going on in the Mass.

 

[metis]

As it is written:

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Rev_22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.​

"Thanks" for not answering my questions or even spending any time to actually look at that which I linked you to.

Your approach is very disingenuous, thus undermining any credibility that you may think you have. You really haven't a clue with what you're talking about, and are not even willing to do the research that I linked you to.

If your church teaches you that this is the intelligent and moral way to go, please look for another denomination that deals with real scriptural study and then being honest with what's actually there. There's a lot of charleton

IOW, I'm simply not going to waste any more time until you actually do some research on your own and not just copy & paste from those whom are teaching you such nonsense. Please study because you are being "played".

 

[sooda]

I know both scripture and history. You on the other hand have only shown you do not know the scriptures as you cannot reconcile Daniel 8s "little Horn" to the fact that

1. Antiochus IV Epiphanes did not fulfill all the signs of Daniel 8. This was demonstrated in post # 382 linked that you simply choose to ignore

and...

2. Antiochus IV Epiphanes lived BEFORE JESUS and JESUS says that the abomination of desolation was a FUTURE EVENT to the disciples showing that the interpretation of the Abomination of desolation to Antiochus IV is a false interpretation of the scriptures.

The only power that fits all these scriptures in Daniel, Matthew and Revelation is the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH (not the people God has many of his people in this false Church). This is the true AntiChrist and the one who thought to change times and law *DANIEL 7:25.

How about you reconcile all the above here that you have chosen to ignore (not to mention all the detailed posts and scriptures from CT showing why you are in error)? If you cannot than all your showing is that your interpretation of the scriptures are false and your simply trying to read into the scriptures what the scriptures do not say or teach.

Hope this is helpful

@Ian

Jesus says when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of in Daniel flee to the mountains.

Hanukkah and the Abomination of Desolation

Daniel’s prophecy about the abomination of desolation was fulfilled in the days of the Hanukkah Revolt, but it is not merely a relic of Jewish history. Our Master warned his disciples that history would repeat itself. He told his disciples that, if they should see “the abomination of desolation spoken of by the Prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place,” they should flee from Jerusalem and Judea and take shelter in the hills (Matthew 24:15). These words predicted the rise of another tyrant like Antiochus who would place an image in God’s Temple.

 

[3rdAngel]

QUOTES FROM THE REFORMERS ABOUT THE POPE AND THE PAPACY

Nicolaus Von Amsdorf (1483 - 1565)
"He (the antichrist) will be revealed and come to naught before the last day, so that every man shall comprehend and recognize that the pope is the real, true antichrist and not the vicar of Christ ... Therefore those who consider the pope and his bishops as Christian shepherds and bishops are deeply in error, but even more are those who believe the the Turk (ISLAM) is the antichrist. Because the Turk (ISLAM) rules outside of the church and does not sit in the holy place, nor does he seek to bear the name of Christ, but is an open antagonist of Christ and His church. This does not need to be revealed, but it is clear and evident because he persecutes Christians openly and not as the pope does, secretly under the form of Godliness." (Nicolaus Von Amsdorf, Furnemliche und gewisse Zeichen, sig.A2r.,v.)

Martin Luther (1483 - 1546)
"nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the church; while he yet sits in the church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny." (Martin Luther, First Principles, pp. 196-197)

Flacius (1570)
"The sixth and last reason for our separation from the pope and his followers be this; By many writings of our church, by the Divinely inspired Word, by prophecies concerning the future and by the special characteristics of the Papacy, it has been profusely and thoroughly proved that the pope with his prelates and clergy is the real true great antichrist, that his kingdom is the real Babylon, a never ceasing fountain and a mother of all abominable idolatry." (Flacius, Etliche Hochwichtige Ursachen und Grunde, warum das siche alle Christen von dem Antichrist ... absondern sollen)

Georg Nigrinus (1530 - 1602)
"The Jesuits claim to be sorely offended and have taken my declarations as an insult and blasphemy in branding the Papacy as the antichrist of which Daniel, Paul, Peter, John and even Christ prophesied. But this is as true as it is that Jesus is the Messiah, and I am prepared to show it even by their own definition of the word 'antichrist'." (Translated from "Nigrinus, Antichrists Grundliche Offenbarung" fol. 6v.)

"This Jesuit further contends that the Papacy cannot be antichrist because the Papacy has lasted for centuries, but that the antichrist is supposed to reign only for 3 1/2 years ... But no one doubts today that Daniel spoke of YEAR-DAYS, not literal days ... The prophetic time-periods of forty-two months, 1260 days, 1, 2, 1/2 times are prophetic, and according to Ezekiel 4, a day must be taken for a year." (Translated from "Nigrinus, Antichrists Grundliche Offenbarung" fols.28v. 29r.)

John Calvin (1509 - 1564)
"Though it be admitted that Rome was once the mother of all Churches, yet from the time when it began to be the seat of Antichrist it has ceased to be what it was before. Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman Pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt .. I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol.3, p.149)

John Knox (1505 - 1572)
Yea, to speak it in plain words; lest that we submit ourselves to Satan, thinking that we submit ourselves to Jesus Christ, for, as for your Roman kirk, as it is now corrupted, and the authority thereof, whereon stands the hope of your victory, I no more doubt but that it is the synagogue of Satan, and the head thereof, called the pope, to be that man of sin, of whom the apostle speaks." (John Knox, The History of the Reformation of Religion in Scotland, p.65)

Thomas Cranmer (1489 - 1556)
"Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of Antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons." (Works by Cranmer, vol.1, pp.6-7)

Roger Williams (1603 - 1683)
Pastor Williams spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself...speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws; but he is the son of perdition." (The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers by Froom, Vol. 3, pg. 52)

The Baptist Confession of Faith (1689)
"The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church, in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner; neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ." (1689 Baptist Confession of Faith)

The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646)
"There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalts himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God." (1646 Westminster Confession of Faith)

John Wesley (1703 - 1791)
"... In many respects, the Pope has an indisputable claim to those titles. He is, in an emphatical sense, the man of sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled, the son of perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers, destroyed innumerable souls, and will himself perish everlastingly. He it is that opposeth himself to the emperor, once his rightful sovereign; and that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped - Commanding angels, and putting kings under his feet, both of whom are called gods in scripture; claiming the highest power, the highest honour; suffering himself, not once only, to be styled God or vice-God. Indeed no less is implied in his ordinary title, "Most Holy Lord," or, "Most Holy Father." So that he sitteth - Enthroned. In the temple of God - Mentioned Rev. xi, 1. Declaring himself that he is God - Claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone." (John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon The New Testament, p.216)

Charles Spurgeon (1834 - 1892)
"It is the bounden duty of every Christian to pray against Antichrist, and as to what Antichrist is no sane man ought to raise a question. If it be not the popery in the Church of Rome there is nothing in the world that can be called by that name. If there were to be issued a hue and cry for Antichrist, we should certainly take up this church on suspicion, and it would certainly not be let loose again, for it so exactly answers the description."

"Popery is contrary to Christ’s Gospel, and is the Antichrist, and we ought to pray against it. It should be the daily prayer of every believer that Antichrist might be hurled like a millstone into the flood and for Christ, because it wounds Christ, because it robs Christ of His glory, because it puts sacramental efficacy in the place of His atonement, and lifts a piece of bread into the place of the Saviour, and a few drops of water into the place of the Holy Ghost, and puts a mere fallible man like ourselves up as the vicar of Christ on earth; if we pray against it, because it is against Him, we shall love the persons though we hate their errors: we shall love their souls though we loath and detest their dogmas, and so the breath of our prayers will be sweetened, because we turn our faces towards Christ when we pray." (Michael de Semlyen, All Roads Lead to Rome)

Rev. J.A.Wylie (1808 - 1890)
"The same line of proof which establishes that Christ is the promised Messiah, conversely applied, establishes that the Roman system is the predicted Apostacy. In the life of Christ we behold the converse of what the Antichrist must be; and in the prophecy of the Antichrist we are shown the converse of what Christ must be, and was. And when we place the Papacy between the two, and compare it with each, we find, on the one hand, that it is the perfect converse of Christ as seen in his life; and on the other, that it is the perfect image of the Antichrist, as shown in the prophecy of him. We conclude, therefore, that if Jesus of Nazareth be the Christ, the Roman Papacy is the Antichrist." (J.A.Wylie, Preface to "The Papacy is the Antichrist, A Demonstration")

Ellen G. White (1827 - 1915)
"This compromise between paganism and Christianity resulted in the development of "the man of sin" foretold in prophecy as opposing and exalting himself above God. That gigantic system of false religion is a masterpiece of Satan's power - a monument of his efforts to seat himself upon the throne to rule the earth according to his will."

"To secure worldly gains and honors, the church was led to seek the favor and support of the great men of earth; and having thus rejected Christ, she was induced to yield allegiance to the representative of Satan - the bishop of Rome ... Prophecy had declared that the papacy was to "think to change times and laws. (Daniel 7:25)" (E.G.White, The Great Controversy, pp.49-51)

And Many More ...
You can see above what the reformers believed. And there were many more reformers who knew the truth that the pope was the leader of the antichrist church, including; William Tyndale, John Wycliffe, Philipp Melanchthon, Huldreich Zwingli, The Translators of the King James Bible, and so on.

 

[3rdAngel]

Historical Interpretation of the Antichrist, showing the Reformers believed the Antichrist was the Papacy. in their own words

Eberhard II, archbishop of Salzburg (1200-1246), for example, set forth the teaching that the little horn of Daniel 7 was the Pope, that the Pope was a wolf in shepherd's garb, the Antichrist, the son of perdition. He did not look into the future for the coming of an unidentified individual called the Antichrist. Instead, he looked back over the centuries since Rome's dismemberment and saw in the historical Papacy, a system, or succession; the fulfilment of the prophecies concerning the Antichrist. He was excommunicated by the Pope and died under the ban in 1246. (Ibid., vol.1, p.798).

John Foxe, noted writer of 'Foxe's Book of Martyrs', gives a list of learned men between 1331 and 1360 who contended against the false claims of the Pope. One of these, Michael of Cesena, who had numerous followers, not a few of whom were slain, declared the Pope "to be the Antichrist, and the church of Rome to be the whore of Babylon, drunk with the blood of the saints." (Foxe, 'Acts and Movements', p.445).

John Wyclif (sometimes spelled Wycliffe), noted English Reformer, taught that the persecuting "little horn" of Daniel had found fulfilment in the Papacy which arose out of the fourth kingdom, Rome. "Why is it necessary in unbelief to look for another Antichrist?" he asked. "In the Seventh Chapter of Daniel, the Antichrist is forcefully described as a horn arising in the time of the fourth kingdom... wearing out the saints of the most high." (Froom, vol.2, p.445). His book, the 'Mirror of the Antichrist', is filled with references to the Pope as the Antichrist.

From the ministry of Wyclif sprang the English "Lollards" which numbered in the hundreds of thousands. We give their testimony in the words of one of them, Lord Cobham. When brought before King Henry V and admonished to submit to the Pope as an obedient child, Cobham replied: "As touching the Pope and his spirituality, I owe him neither suit nor service, forasmuch as I know him by the Scriptures to be the great Antichrist, the son of perdition." (Guinness, 'Romanism and the Reformation', p.134). This was a century before Luther.

Walter Brute, noted scholar, prophetic expositor, and associate of Wyclif, was accused in 1391 of oftentimes and commonly claiming that "the Pope is the Antichrist and a seducer of the people." (Foxe, Vol.1, p.543).

Sir John Oldcastle (1360-1417), famous Christian of Herefordshire, spoke of the Pope in these words: "I know him by the Scriptures to be the great Antichrist, the Son of perdition... Rome is the very nest of the Antichrist, and out of that nest come all the disciples of him." He was sentenced to death for naming the Antichrist. Though the sentence was not immediately carried out, in 1417 he was dragged to St. Giles, suspended in chains, and slowly burned to death as his voice ascended in praise to God. (Ibid., p.636-641).

John Huss (1369-1415), born in Bohemia, was a well educated man who came under the influence of Wyclif's writings which caused him to break with the church of Rome. He labelled the Pope as the Antichrist of which the Scriptures had warned. His writings constantly refer to the Antichrist as the enemy of the church - not as a Jew, a pagan, or a Turk - but as a false confessor of the name of Christ.

Pope Martin V issued a bull in 1418 in which he ordered the punishment of both men or women who held to the teachings of Wyclif and Huss. Sixty miles from Prague, on a steep mountain, the city of Tabor was built to which the "Hussites" could "flee from the Antichrist." ('The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers', vol.2, p.121).

Huss himself was condemned as a heretic and delivered to the secular arm for execution. Accompanied by a guard of 1,000 armed men and a vast crowd of spectators, he was led through the churchyard where he saw a bonfire of his books in the public square. As he knelt and prayed, his hands were tied behind him and a rusty chain wound round his neck. Straw and wood were piled around him. The name Huss meant "goose" in the Bohemian tongue and at the place of execution Huss reportedly said: "This day ye are burning a goose; but from my ashes will arise a swan, which ye will not be able to roast" - an expression later quoted by Luther. "Huss began to sing," writes Froom, "but the wind swept the flames into his face and silenced his words. Only his lips moved - until they too were stilled in death for his stand against the Antichrist of Bible prophecy." (Ibid., p.116).

Martin Luther (1483-1546), while still a priest of the Romish church, disagreed with the practice of selling indulgences. At first, he sought reform within the church. But as he grew in the knowledge of Christ, he saw that reform would be impossible and that the message was to"come out of her." Being loosened from the bondages of this system, he began to wonder if the Pope was the Antichrist. Eventually this belief became pronounced. His friends, fearing for his safety, begged him to suppress his book 'To the German Nobility'. To this he replied on August 18, 1520: "We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist... personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to the Antichrist." (Ibid., p.256). Two months later, in October 1520, Luther's book 'On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church' was published. In this he spoke of the Papacy (the system, not necessarily the individual Pope who then reigned) as "nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of the very Antichrist... For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the Church; while he yet sits in the Church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny." (Luther, 'First Principles', pp.196-197).

In 1540, Luther wrote: "Oh Christ, my Lord, look down upon us and bring upon us thy day of judgment, and destroy the brood of Satan in Rome. There sits the Man, of whom the apostle Paul wrote (2 THESSALONIANS 2:3-4) that he will oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God - that man of Sin, that Son of Perdition... he suppresses the Law of God and exalts his commandments above the commandments of God." (Froom, Vol.2, p.281).

To Luther, the scriptures did not portray the Antichrist as an infidel, or a super-politician, but as he that would rise within the Church realm; that is, "in the midst of Christendom." Concerning the man of sin, he pointed out that he "sitteth not in a stable of fiends, or in a swine-sty, or in a company of infidels, but in the highest and holiest place of all, namely, in the temple of God." Further, he explains: "Is not this to sit in the temple of God, to profess himself to be the Ruler in the whole Church? What is the temple of God? Is it stones and wood? Did not Paul say, "the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are?" To sit - what is it but to reign, to teach, and to judge? Who from the beginning of the Church has dared to call himself master of the whole Church but the Pope alone? None of the saints, none of the heretics ever uttered so horrible a word of pride." (Luther, 'Works', vol.2, p.385).

It is evident that Luther did not believe the Antichrist would be some lone individual at the end of time, for he said: "The Antichrist of whom Paul speaks now reigns in the court of Rome." Martin Luther understood that the Papacy was the Antichrist of prophecy! As the Encyclopaedia Britannica says, "These ideas became the dynamic force which drove Luther on in his contest with the Papacy." (Vol.2, p.61, Article: 'The Antichrist').

Among other leaders with Luther in the Reformation in Germany was Andreas Oslander (1498-1552), who also took a stand against the Roman Antichrist who spoke words against God and who had seated himself in God's temple. His concept of the Antichrist was not limited to one individual man. He believed it was the Papal ecclesiastical system which rose with the fall of Rome and would extend until the end time. He felt that the Papal contention, that the Antichrist was some future person, had caused people to look ahead for a fictitious Antichrist and thus overlook the real Antichrist at Rome, who had already exerted his influence for centuries. (Froom, 'The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers', vol.2, pp.296-299).

To be continued...

 

[3rdAngel]

Nicolaus von Amsdorf (1483-1565), a close friend and zealous co-worker of Luther, believed that the Antichrist was to rise within the church realm and that "the pope is the real, true Antichrist and not the vicar of Christ." (Ibid., p.305).

Philipp Melanchton (1497-1560), also associated with Luther, said: "Since, it is certain that the pontiffs and the monks have forbidden marriage (cf. 1 TIMOTHY 4:1-3), it is most manifest, and true without any doubt, that the Roman Pontiff, with his whole order and kingdom, is the very Antichrist... Likewise in 2 THESSALONIANS 2, Paul clearly says that the man of sin will rule in the church, exalting himself above the worship of God." (Ibid., p.288) etc.

Generally regarded as second only to Luther in influence is the eminent French reformer John Calvin (1509-1564). Originally a son of the Romish church, about 1532 he embraced the Protestant faith. His published works fill some fifty volumes. Concerning the Pope he said: "I deny him to be the vicar of Christ, who, infuriously persecuting the gospel, demonstrates by his conduct that he is the Antichrist - I deny him to be the successor of Peter... I deny him to be the head of the church." (Calvin, 'Tracts', Vol.1, pp.219-220).

In his classic 'Institutes' he wrote: "Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff the Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt... I shall briefly show that Paul's words in 2 THESSALONIANS 2 are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." He then points out that the Antichrist was to conceal himself under the character of the church, "as under a mask", and shows how the Papacy has fulfilled the characteristics set forth by Paul.

John Knox (1505-1572), especially known for his Reformation work in Scotland, was persecuted from country to country until finally the affairs of Scotland were in Protestant hands. Knox preached that Romish traditions and ceremonies should be abolished as well as "that tyranny which the Pope himself has for so many ages exercised over the church" and that he should be acknowledged as "the very Antichrist, and son of perdition, of whom Paul speaks." (Knox, 'The Zurich Letters', p.199).

In public challenge, Knox said: "As for your Roman Church, as it is now corrupted... I no more doubt but that it is the Synagogue of Satan; and the Head thereof, called the Pope, to be that man of Sin of whom the Apostle speaketh."

John Napier (1550-1617), noted Scottish mathematician and adherent of the Protestant cause, wrote a commentary on Revelation which the Encyclopaedia Britannica refers to as the first important Scottish work on the interpretation of Scripture. He taught that the Antichrist was the Pope - and not a Turk, a Jew, or someone outside the church realm - for he "must sit, saith Paul, in the Church of God." (Froom, 'The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers', vol.2, p.461).

Huldreich Zwingli (1484-1531) was a prominent figure in the work of the Reformation that broke out in Switzerland. On December 28, 1524, he very wisely pointed out that the Papacy was evil, but that it must be overthrown by the preaching of the Word in love and never by hatred. In reference to the Papacy, he said: "I know that in it works the might and power of the devil, that is, of the Antichrist... the Papacy has to be abolished... But by no other means can it be more thoroughly routed than by the Word of God (2 THESSALONIANS 2), because as soon as the world receives this in the right way, it will turn away from the Pope without compulsion." ('Principal Works of Zwingli', Vol.7, p.461).

Heinrich Bullinger (1504-1575), friend of Zwingli, is regarded as one of the greatest prophetic expositors of the time. He explained that the kingdom of the Popes rose up among the divisions of Rome, and that the Pope is the Antichrist because he usurps the keys of Christ and his kingly and priestly authority. (Froom, vol.2, p.343).

Theodor Bibliander (1504-1564), called the "Father of Biblical Exegesis in Switzerland", a noted translator and Bible scholar, declared that the Papacy is the Antichrist predicted in 2 THESSALONIANS 2. (Bibliander, 'Relatio Fidells', p.58).

Alfonsus Conradus who fled from Italy to Switzerland because of his religious convictions, wrote a large commentary in 1560 on the book of Revelation in which he taught that the Roman Papacy is the Antichrist. He said it was useless to wait for the coming of the Antichrist in the future, for he had already been revealed in the Papacy. (Froom, vol.2, p.319).

William Tyndale (1485-1536), first translator of the Bible from Greek to English, Reformer and martyr, held that the Romish church was Babylon and that the Pope was the man of sin or the Antichrist, seated in the temple of God, i.e. the Church (Ibid., p.356). Repeatedly he cited 2 THESSALONIANS 2 in this connection.

Nicholas Ridley (1500-1555), a famed English martyr, and man of great learning, memorised most of the epistles in Greek and wrote numerous works. He spoke out on the deceptions of Romanism and that "the head, under satan, of all mischief is the Antichrist and his brood."

Before his martyrdom on October 16, 1555, Ridley wrote a farewell in which he said good-bye to his wife, brothers, sisters, and friends. He gave a review of his faith and spoke of how the Papacy had developed over the centuries. He spoke of Rome as "the seat of satan; and the bishop of the same, that maintaineth the abominations thereof, is the Antichrist himself indeed." (Letters of Bishop Ridley, letter 32).

A friend of Ridley, John Bradford (1510-1555), a noted preacher, was also martyred for his Protestant stand. On June 30, 1555, he was taken from prison late at night, all the prisoners tearfully bidding him farewell. As he passed along, great crowds were waiting, many weeping and praying for him.

Standing by the stake where he would be killed, he raised both hands and called England to repentance. He wrote a farewell in which he declared that he was condemned "for not acknowledging the Antichrist of Rome to be Christ's vicar - general and supreme head of the Catholic and universal church." He spoke of the Papacy as being "undoubtedly that great Antichrist, of whom the apostles do so much admonish us." (Froom. vol.2, p.377).

John Hooper (1495-1555) was one of the first arrested for his Protestant faith when Mary came to the throne in England. He was condemned because he would not accept the "wicked papistical religion of the bishop of Rome." As a throng of 7,000 gathered - many of them weeping - Hooper was bound to a stake and slowly burned while he prayed. He believed that the so-called Vicar of Christ was really the great and principal enemy of Christ, that in him were found the very properties of the Antichrist, and that these things were openly known to all men that were not blinded with the smoke of Rome. (Ibid., pp.381-382).

Hugh Latimer (1490-1555) was won to the Protestant faith and became a fervent preacher with no time for hypocrisy or tyranny. In commenting on the words of Paul in 2 THESSALONIANS 2, he said in 1552: "The Lord will not come till 'the swerving from faith cometh': which thing is already done and past." The falling away was not some future thing to Latimer. Nor was the man of sin an individual yet to come, for speaking of his day, Latimer said: "The Antichrist is known throughout all the world." (Ibid., p.371).

Thomas Cranmer (1489-1556), writing in 1550 said of the Papacy: "I know how the Antichrist hath obscured the glory of God, and the true knowledge of His Word, overcasting the same with mists and clouds of error and ignorance through false glosses and interpretation...

The Antichrist of Rome... hath extolled himself above his fellow bishops, as God's vicar, yea, rather as God Himself; and taketh upon him authority over kings and emperors, and sitteth in the temple of God, that is, in the consciences of men, and causeth his decrees to be more regarded than God's laws; yea, and for money he dispenseth with God's laws, and all other, giving men license to break them." (Cranmer, 'Works', vol.1, pp.6-7).

After quoting from the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, he says: "Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of the Antichrist, and the Pope to be the very Antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers and strong reasons." (Ibid., pp.62-63).

Cranmer was martyred for this Protestant faith. In his dying testimony he said: "And as for the Pope, I refuse him as Christ's enemy and the Antichrist, with all his false doctrine." He was then led to the fire, said a few more words, and finally the flames left him a blackened corpse.

Thomas Becon (1511-1567), author of numerous books on Popery, wrote: "We desire of our heavenly Father, that the Antichrist with his kingdom, which hath seduced, and daily doth seduce... may shortly be slain and brought unto confusion 'with the breath of the Lord's mouth'...that 'that sinful man, the son of perdition, which is an adversary, and is exalted above all that is called God, or that is worshipped' may no longer 'sit in the temple of god, boasting himself to be God'." (Froom, vol.2, p.403).

TO BE CONTINUED...

 

[3rdAngel]

One of the great intellectuals of the English reformation was John Jewel (1522-1571). He listed some of the misconceptions held by the Roman Catholic church as to the Antichrist: that he would be a Jew of the tribe of Dan, born in Babylonia or Syria, or be Mohammed, or that he would overthrow Rome or rebuild Jerusalem, etc. Then he commented: "These tales have been craftily devised to beguile our eyes, that, whilst we think upon these guises, and so occupy ourselves in beholding a shadow or probable conjecture of the Antichrist, he which is the Antichrist indeed may unawares deceive us." He was referring to the Papacy.

He then mentions that if we took the term "man of sin" by itself, we might suppose that an individual man is meant. But taking all of the evidence into consideration, we understand that a succession of men is the proper meaning. He pointed out that pagan Rome was the hindering power that prevented the development of the Antichrist and that "Paul saith, the Antichrist shall not come yet; for the emperor letteth him: the emperor shall be removed; and then shall the Antichrist come." This system of apostasy shall continue until it is destroyed at the Lord's coming. "He meaneth not, therefore, that the Antichrist shall be any one man only, but one estate or kingdom of men, and a continuance of some one power and tyranny in the church." (Jewel, 'An Exposition Upon the Two Epistles to the Thessalonians', vol.2, p.813).

Jewel mentioned some of the Papal claims: that the Pope is lord over all the world, king of kings, and that every knee should bow to him; that his authority reaches into heaven and down into hell; that he can command the angels of God; that he can forgive sins, etc. "This is the Antichrist. This is his power. Thus shall he work and make himself manifest. So shall he sit in the temple of God - as though to take God's place."

Twenty-two of the sermons of Edwin Sandys (1519-1588) have been preserved to our day. In his sermon on ISAIAH 55:1: "Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters... come ye, buy... without money and without price", he contrasted this invitation with that of the Papal Antichrist who requires money for his blessing: "He that sitteth in the temple of God, and termeth himself Christ's vicar, doth in like sort offer unto the people bread, water, wine, milk, pardon of sins, grace, mercy, and eternal life; but not freely: he is a merchant, he giveth nothing, and that is nothing which he selleth... his holy water cannot wash away the spots... his blasphemous masses do not appease, but provoke God's wrath... his rotten relics cannot comfort you... by his Latin service ye cannot be edified, or made wiser. Yet this trumpery they sell for money, and upon this trash they cause silly men to waste their substance... Thus you see a manifest difference between Christ and the Antichrist." ('The Sermons of Edwin Sandys', pp.11-12).

William Fluke (1538-1589), an English puritan, pointed to Rome as the seat of the Antichrist (which was taken after the seat of the civil empire was removed) and that the Antichrist was a succession of men, not a single individual. By looking at Rome, he says, "It is easy to find the person by St. Paul's description; and this note especially, that excludeth theheathen tyrants, 'He shall sit in the temple of God': which we see to be fulfilled in the Pope... the Pope is that 'Man of Sin', and 'Son of Perdition', the adversary that lifteth up himself 'above all that is called God'; and shall be destroyed 'by the glory of his coming'."

In 1611, what is known as the "King James Version" of the Bible was issued and has ever since been in wide circulation and use. The translators, men of learning and with a knowledge of history, recognised that the Papacy was the man of sin and that the open publication of scriptural truth was dealing a great blow to him. Thus they wrote in their dedication to King James: "...The zeal of your majesty toward the house of God doth not slack or go backward but is more and more kindled, manifesting itself abroad in the farthest parts of Christendom by writing a defence of the truth which hath givensuch a blow to that man of sin as will not be healed." It is evident that these men did not think the man of sin was an individual to be revealed at some future time!

King James (1566-1625) himself believed that following the removal of the Roman emperors, the reign of the Antichrist began. This was, of course, a reference to the rise of the Papacy which he believed to be the Antichrist and Mystery of Iniquity. (Froom, vol.2, pp.540-541).

Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727) is well known in history because of his scientific research, especially in connection with the laws of gravitation. He was a writer, mathematician, philosopher, and also a student of Bible prophecy! His writings on prophecy - from a study of 42 years - entitled 'Observations Upon the Prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse of St. John'was published six years after his death. Newton linked the little horn of Daniel 7 with the Papacy, rising among the ten kingdoms into which the Roman empire fell. "But it was a kingdom of a different kind from the other ten kingdoms... By its eyes it was a Seer; and by its mouth speaking great things and changing times and laws, it was a Prophet as well as a King. And such a Seer, a Prophet and a King, is the church of Rome. A Seer... is a Bishop in the literal sense of the word; and this Church claims the universal Bishopric. With his mouth he gives laws to kings and nations as an Oracle; and pretends to Infallibility, and that his dictates are binding to the whole world; which is to be a Prophet in the highest degree." (Newton, 'Observations on the Prophecies', p.75).

TO BE CONTINUED...

 

[3rdAngel]

Johann Albrecht Bengel (1687-1725), "early became convinced that the Pope was the predicted Antichrist." Through his books which were translated into many languages, he had a strong influence upon a number of people, including Wesley.

John Wesley (1703-1791), founder of Methodism, whose ministry has affected the lives of multiplied thousands, believed the man of sin had found fulfilment in the "Romish Papacy." (Wesley, 'Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament', pp.290).

In 1754, Wesley wrote these words concerning the Papacy: "He is in an emphatical sense, the Man of Sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled the Son of Perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers... He it is... that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped... claiming the highest power, and highest honour... claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone." (quoted in the 'Antichrist and His Ten Kingdoms', p.110).

Froom sums up the evidence in these words: "We have seen the remarkable unanimity of belief of Reformation leaders in every land that the Antichrist of prophecy is not to be a single individual - some sort of superman - who will wrack and well-nigh wreck the world just before the second advent of Christ. Instead, they found that it was a vast system of apostasy, or rather, an imposing counterfeit of truth which had developed within the jurisdiction of that divinely appointed custodian of truth, the Christian Church." (Froom, vol.2, p.793).

A number of notable books on the Papal Antichrist were written during the centuries that followed the Reformation. We will mention two: 'Roman Antichrist', written in 1612 by Andreas Helwig of Berlin (the first according to Froom, as well as Elliott, to link the number 666 with the Papal designation "Vicarius Filii Dei") and 'Dissertations on the Prophecies', written by Thomas Newton in 1748, which showed that the prophecy of the man of sin had found fulfilment in the Roman Papacy.

This same point was emphasised in the Protestant Creeds. The 'Westminster Confession of Faith' used by the Church of England and later by the Presbyterian Church says: "There is no other Head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ, nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof, but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and Son of Perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God." (Chapter 25, Section 6). This same basic statement, with difference only in wording, is found in the 'Savoy Declaration' of the Congregational Church, the 'Baptist Confession' of 1689, and in the 'Philadelphia Confession of Faith'.

The 'Morland Confession' of 1508 and 1535 (which represented the beliefs of the Waldensian Brethren) says in article 8: "That the Antichrist, that man of sin, doth sit in the Temple of God, that is, in the Church, of whom the Prophets, and Christ and His Apostles foretold, admonishing all the godly, to beware of him and his errors, and not suffer themselves to be drawn aside from the Truth."

The Reformation work in Switzerland produced the 'Helvetic Confession' in 1536 in which the Papacy is mentioned as the predicted Antichrist. The Lutheran Statement contained in the 'Smalcald Articles' says: "The Pope is the very Antichrist, who exalteth himself above, and opposeth himself against Christ, because he will not permit Christians to be saved without his power, which, nevertheless, is nothing, and is neither ordained nor commanded by God..." These Creeds represented the belief of multiplied thousands.

As churches were established in America, it was this same view concerning the Papacy that was held. In 1680 the churches of New England drew up a Confession of faith which stated that Jesus Christ is the head of the church and notthe Pope of Rome who is indeed the Antichrist and the Son of Perdition. "This", writes Froom, "was the commonly accepted American position." (Ibid. vol.3, p.111).

As Samuel Lee (1625-1691), a learned minister of New Bristol, Rhode Island, said: "It is agreed among all maintainers of the Evangelical Church that the Roman Pontiff is the Antichrist." (Lee, 'The Cutting Off of the Antichrist', p.1).

John Cotton (1584-1652), a Puritan minister of Plymouth and Boston, taught that REVELATION 13 was a picture of the Papacy. Cotton is regarded as America's first prophetic expositor.

Roger Williams (1603-1683), founder of Rhode Island and pastor of the first Baptist church in America, likewise, spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself... speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws: but he is the son of perdition (2 THESSALONIANS 2)." (Froom, vol.3, p.52).

Cotton Mather (1663-1728), a Congregational theologian, in his book 'Fall of Babylon' asked the question: "Is the Pope of Rome to be looked upon as the Antichrist, whose coming and reigning was foretold in the ancient oracles?" To this he answered: "The oracles of God foretold the rising of an Antichrist in the Christian Church; and in the Pope of Rome, allthe characteristics of that Antichrist are so marvellously answered that if any who read the Scriptures do not see it, there is a marvellous blindness upon them." (Ibid., vol.3, p.113).

Samuel Cooper (1725-1783), while delivering a series of lectures at Harvard, said: "If the Antichrist is not to be found in the chair of St. Peter, he is nowhere to be found." He believed the Antichrist was the succession of bishops in Rome. (Cooper, 'A Discourse on the Man of Sin', p.12).

Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758), a famous revivalist and third president of Princeton, identified the "Pope and his clergy" as the power prophesied in 2 THESSALONIANS, DANIEL 7 and REVELATION 13, and 17. His grandson, Timothy Dwight(1752-1817), also a minister, spoke of how the Popes "have seated themselves in the Church, or temple of God, and shewed that they were God, by assuming powers, which belong only to God: the powers, for instance, of making laws to bind the consciences of men; or pardoning sin; of forming religious establishments; of introducing new laws for the conduct and government of the church... thus have they exalted themselves above all that is called God, or that is worshipped." (Dwight, 'A Sermon Preached at Northampton', p.27).

..............

I believe the same as the early reformers did and that is that the Antichrist and the man of sin as described in the scriptures is the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church (not the people or whom God has many that he is calling out to whorship him in Spirit and in truth).

Hope this is helpful

 

[3rdAngel]

@Ian

Daniel’s prophecy about the abomination of desolation was fulfilled in the days of the Hanukkah Revolt, but it is not merely a relic of Jewish history. Our Master warned his disciples that history would repeat itself. He told his disciples that, if they should see “the abomination of desolation spoken of by the Prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place,” they should flee from Jerusalem and Judea and take shelter in the hills (Matthew 24:15). These words predicted the rise of another tyrant like Antiochus who would place an image in God’s Temple.

Your promoting nonsense here Soda and simply cutting and pasting from other peoples websites. You have been given reasons why your interpretation of the scriptures are in error but your response is to simply ignore these posts and scriptures that show why you are in error. Your only repeating yourself without addressing anyone's posts that disagree with you.

I know both scripture and history. You on the other hand have only shown you do not know the scriptures as you cannot reconcile Daniel 8s "little Horn" to the fact that

1. Antiochus IV Epiphanes did not fulfill all the signs of Daniel 8. This was demonstrated in post # 382 linked that you simply choose to ignore

and...

2. Antiochus IV Epiphanes lived BEFORE JESUS and JESUS says that the abomination of desolation was a FUTURE EVENT to the disciples showing that the interpretation of the Abomination of desolation to Antiochus IV is a false interpretation of the scriptures.

The only power that fits all these scriptures in Daniel, Matthew and Revelation is the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH (not the people God has many of his people in this false Church). This is the true ANTICHRIST and the one who thought to change times and law *DANIEL 7:25.

How about you reconcile all the above here that you have chosen to ignore (not to mention all the detailed posts and scriptures from CT showing why you are in error)? If you cannot than all your showing is that your interpretation of the scriptures are false and your simply trying to read into the scriptures what the scriptures do not say or teach.

If you disagree with what I have posted here please reconcile this post. If you cannot than all your showing is that you have no answers to the posts and scriptures provided only as a help to you that show why you are in error.

This is only meant to be helpful to this discussion

 

[coconut theology]

QUOTES FROM THE REFORMERS ABOUT THE POPE AND THE PAPACY

Nicolaus Von Amsdorf (1483 - 1565)
"He (the antichrist) will be revealed and come to naught before the last day, so that every man shall comprehend and recognize that the pope is the real, true antichrist and not the vicar of Christ ... Therefore those who consider the pope and his bishops as Christian shepherds and bishops are deeply in error, but even more are those who believe the the Turk (ISLAM) is the antichrist. Because the Turk (ISLAM) rules outside of the church and does not sit in the holy place, nor does he seek to bear the name of Christ, but is an open antagonist of Christ and His church. This does not need to be revealed, but it is clear and evident because he persecutes Christians openly and not as the pope does, secretly under the form of Godliness." (Nicolaus Von Amsdorf, Furnemliche und gewisse Zeichen, sig.A2r.,v.)

Martin Luther (1483 - 1546)
"nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the church; while he yet sits in the church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny." (Martin Luther, First Principles, pp. 196-197)

Flacius (1570)
"The sixth and last reason for our separation from the pope and his followers be this; By many writings of our church, by the Divinely inspired Word, by prophecies concerning the future and by the special characteristics of the Papacy, it has been profusely and thoroughly proved that the pope with his prelates and clergy is the real true great antichrist, that his kingdom is the real Babylon, a never ceasing fountain and a mother of all abominable idolatry." (Flacius, Etliche Hochwichtige Ursachen und Grunde, warum das siche alle Christen von dem Antichrist ... absondern sollen)

Georg Nigrinus (1530 - 1602)
"The Jesuits claim to be sorely offended and have taken my declarations as an insult and blasphemy in branding the Papacy as the antichrist of which Daniel, Paul, Peter, John and even Christ prophesied. But this is as true as it is that Jesus is the Messiah, and I am prepared to show it even by their own definition of the word 'antichrist'." (Translated from "Nigrinus, Antichrists Grundliche Offenbarung" fol. 6v.)

"This Jesuit further contends that the Papacy cannot be antichrist because the Papacy has lasted for centuries, but that the antichrist is supposed to reign only for 3 1/2 years ... But no one doubts today that Daniel spoke of YEAR-DAYS, not literal days ... The prophetic time-periods of forty-two months, 1260 days, 1, 2, 1/2 times are prophetic, and according to Ezekiel 4, a day must be taken for a year." (Translated from "Nigrinus, Antichrists Grundliche Offenbarung" fols.28v. 29r.)

John Calvin (1509 - 1564)
"Though it be admitted that Rome was once the mother of all Churches, yet from the time when it began to be the seat of Antichrist it has ceased to be what it was before. Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman Pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt .. I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol.3, p.149)

John Knox (1505 - 1572)
Yea, to speak it in plain words; lest that we submit ourselves to Satan, thinking that we submit ourselves to Jesus Christ, for, as for your Roman kirk, as it is now corrupted, and the authority thereof, whereon stands the hope of your victory, I no more doubt but that it is the synagogue of Satan, and the head thereof, called the pope, to be that man of sin, of whom the apostle speaks." (John Knox, The History of the Reformation of Religion in Scotland, p.65)

Thomas Cranmer (1489 - 1556)
"Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of Antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons." (Works by Cranmer, vol.1, pp.6-7)

Roger Williams (1603 - 1683)
Pastor Williams spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself...speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws; but he is the son of perdition." (The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers by Froom, Vol. 3, pg. 52)

The Baptist Confession of Faith (1689)
"The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church, in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner; neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ." (1689 Baptist Confession of Faith)

The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646)
"There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalts himself in the Church against Christ, and all that is called God." (1646 Westminster Confession of Faith)

John Wesley (1703 - 1791)
"... In many respects, the Pope has an indisputable claim to those titles. He is, in an emphatical sense, the man of sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled, the son of perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers, destroyed innumerable souls, and will himself perish everlastingly. He it is that opposeth himself to the emperor, once his rightful sovereign; and that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped - Commanding angels, and putting kings under his feet, both of whom are called gods in scripture; claiming the highest power, the highest honour; suffering himself, not once only, to be styled God or vice-God. Indeed no less is implied in his ordinary title, "Most Holy Lord," or, "Most Holy Father." So that he sitteth - Enthroned. In the temple of God - Mentioned Rev. xi, 1. Declaring himself that he is God - Claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone." (John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon The New Testament, p.216)

Charles Spurgeon (1834 - 1892)
"It is the bounden duty of every Christian to pray against Antichrist, and as to what Antichrist is no sane man ought to raise a question. If it be not the popery in the Church of Rome there is nothing in the world that can be called by that name. If there were to be issued a hue and cry for Antichrist, we should certainly take up this church on suspicion, and it would certainly not be let loose again, for it so exactly answers the description."

"Popery is contrary to Christ’s Gospel, and is the Antichrist, and we ought to pray against it. It should be the daily prayer of every believer that Antichrist might be hurled like a millstone into the flood and for Christ, because it wounds Christ, because it robs Christ of His glory, because it puts sacramental efficacy in the place of His atonement, and lifts a piece of bread into the place of the Saviour, and a few drops of water into the place of the Holy Ghost, and puts a mere fallible man like ourselves up as the vicar of Christ on earth; if we pray against it, because it is against Him, we shall love the persons though we hate their errors: we shall love their souls though we loath and detest their dogmas, and so the breath of our prayers will be sweetened, because we turn our faces towards Christ when we pray." (Michael de Semlyen, All Roads Lead to Rome)

Rev. J.A.Wylie (1808 - 1890)
"The same line of proof which establishes that Christ is the promised Messiah, conversely applied, establishes that the Roman system is the predicted Apostacy. In the life of Christ we behold the converse of what the Antichrist must be; and in the prophecy of the Antichrist we are shown the converse of what Christ must be, and was. And when we place the Papacy between the two, and compare it with each, we find, on the one hand, that it is the perfect converse of Christ as seen in his life; and on the other, that it is the perfect image of the Antichrist, as shown in the prophecy of him. We conclude, therefore, that if Jesus of Nazareth be the Christ, the Roman Papacy is the Antichrist." (J.A.Wylie, Preface to "The Papacy is the Antichrist, A Demonstration")

Ellen G. White (1827 - 1915)
"This compromise between paganism and Christianity resulted in the development of "the man of sin" foretold in prophecy as opposing and exalting himself above God. That gigantic system of false religion is a masterpiece of Satan's power - a monument of his efforts to seat himself upon the throne to rule the earth according to his will."

"To secure worldly gains and honors, the church was led to seek the favor and support of the great men of earth; and having thus rejected Christ, she was induced to yield allegiance to the representative of Satan - the bishop of Rome ... Prophecy had declared that the papacy was to "think to change times and laws. (Daniel 7:25)" (E.G.White, The Great Controversy, pp.49-51)

And Many More ...
You can see above what the reformers believed. And there were many more reformers who knew the truth that the pope was the leader of the antichrist church, including; William Tyndale, John Wycliffe, Philipp Melanchthon, Huldreich Zwingli, The Translators of the King James Bible, and so on.

You know, I was going to post something similar, but ya beat me to it. Good on ya' mate.

 

[coconut theology]

Philipp Melanchton (1497-1560), also associated with Luther, said: "Since, it is certain that the pontiffs and the monks have forbidden marriage (cf. 1 TIMOTHY 4:1-3), it is most manifest, and true without any doubt, that the Roman Pontiff, with his whole order and kingdom, is the very Antichrist... Likewise in 2 THESSALONIANS 2, Paul clearly says that the man of sin will rule in the church, exalting himself above the worship of God." (Ibid., p.288) etc.

Generally regarded as second only to Luther in influence is the eminent French reformer John Calvin (1509-1564). Originally a son of the Romish church, about 1532 he embraced the Protestant faith. His published works fill some fifty volumes. Concerning the Pope he said: "I deny him to be the vicar of Christ, who, infuriously persecuting the gospel, demonstrates by his conduct that he is the Antichrist - I deny him to be the successor of Peter... I deny him to be the head of the church." (Calvin, 'Tracts', Vol.1, pp.219-220).

In his classic 'Institutes' he wrote: "Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff the Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt... I shall briefly show that Paul's words in 2 THESSALONIANS 2 are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." He then points out that the Antichrist was to conceal himself under the character of the church, "as under a mask", and shows how the Papacy has fulfilled the characteristics set forth by Paul.

I really like what Philip Melanchthon said in regards the prophecies of Daniel and the AntiChrist therein, as it even agrees with what the Papacy has said it has done:


Roman Catholicism is very clear about their act of 'changing' (Daniel 7:25) it. For instance:

Latin:

"... Similiter et feriae a fando dicuntur, ob quam causam Silvester papa primus apud Romanos constituit ut dierum nomina quae antea secundum nomina deorum suorum vocabant, id est, Solis, Lunae, Martis, Mercurii, Veneris, Saturni, feria deinceps vocarent, id est, prima feria, secunda feria, tertia feria, quarta feria, quinta feria, sexta feria, quia in principio Genesis scriptum est quod Deus per singulos dies dixerit : prima, Fiat Lux; secunda, Fiat firmamentum; tertia, Producat terra herbam virentem, similiter, etc. Sabbatum autem antiquo legis vocabulo vocare praecepit, et primam feriam diem Dominicam, eo quod Dominus in illa resurrexit. Statuit autem idem papa ut otium sabbati magis in diem Dominicam transferretur, ut ea die a terrenis operibus ad laudandum Deum vacaremus, justa illud quod scriptum est : Vacate et videte, quoniam ego sum Deus (Psal. XLV). ..." - Beati Rabani Mauri, Fuldensis Abbatis et Moguntini Archiepiscopi, de Clericorum Institutione, ad Heistulphum Archiepiscopum; Libri Tres. (Anno 819.) Ad Fratres Fuldenses Epigramma Ejusdem; Liber Secundus, Caput XLVI. Column 361 (Left; PDF page 35) - http://www.documentacatholicaomnia....eistulphum_Archiepiscopum_Libri_Tres,_MLT.pdf​

Translated English:

"... Pope Sylvester first among the Romans ordered that the names of the days [of the week], which they previously called after the name of their gods, that is, [the day] of the Sun, [the day] of the Moon, [the day] of Mars, [the day] of Mercury, [the day] of Jupiter, [the day] of Venus, [the day] of Saturn, they should call feriae thereafter, that is the first feria, the second feria, the third feria, the fourth feria, the fifth feria, the sixth feria, because that in the beginning of Genesis it is written that God said concerning each day: on the first, "Let there be light:; on the second, "Let there be a firmament"; on the third, "Let the earth bring forth verdure"; etc. But he [Sylvester] ordered [them] to call the Sabbath by the ancient term of the law, [to call] the first feria the "Lord's day," because on it the Lord rose [from the dead], Moreover, the same pope decreed that the rest of the Sabbath should be transferred rather to the [counterfeit] Lord's day [Sunday], in order that on that day we should rest from worldly works for the praise of God.7 ..." - Exactly Which Pope Changed The Sabbath To Sunday?​

Further:

“...yet we find St. Cæsarius of Arles in the sixth century teaching that the holy Doctors of the Church had decreed that the whole glory of the Jewish Sabbath had been transferred to the Sunday, and that Christians must keep the Sunday holy in the same way as the Jews had been commanded to keep holy the Sabbath Day. … From the eight century the law began to be formulated as it exists at the present day, and the local councils forbade servile work, public buying and selling, pleading in the law courts, and the public and solemn taking of oaths. There is a large body of civil legislation on the Sunday rest side by side with the ecclesiastical. ...” [Roman Catholic Online Encyclopedia; Sunday] - CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Sunday​

Council of Trent:

“...But the [Roman Catholic] Church of God has in her wisdom ordained that the celebration of the Sabbath should be transferred to [counterfeit] “the Lord's day:” …” [The Catechism of the Council of Trent; On The Third Commandment; pg 267] - The catechism of the Council of Trent​

... and many more such citations.

Roman Catholicism, changes so much in their answer on this because they are in great error and attempt obfuscation, you can even read Rome's Challenge here -

ROME'S CHALLENGE - WHY DO PROTESTANTS KEEP SUNDAY?

Even Philip Melanchthon, and the Reformation leadership understood this:

Philip Melanchthon on Daniel 7:25 -

"... But what meaneth the aungell to saye: He shall s•arle or destroye ye hyghe sayn∣tis? verely els but that with his false doctryne capciouse othes articles / & in∣terrogacions he shall fraudelently de∣ceyue and trappe the simple innocents and shed their blode tyrannously. Also he shall arrogantly take vpon him & thin∣ke to change the state of tymes and la∣wes. He weneth to change ye tyme which with swerde and fyer thinketh to shorten the lyfe of man and to preuent and disa∣point gods infallible eternall and immu∣table prouidēce wherby he hath prefiyed euery manis tyme & houre of deth which as noman can differre or prolong it / so cā∣ne noman shorten nor preuent it / except men will make God an ignorant persone and so consequently no god at all. He chā∣geth the tymes and lawes that any of the [page 118-119] sixe worke dayes commanded of god will make them vnholy and idle dayes when he lyste / or of their owne holy dayes abo∣lisshed / make* worke dayes agen / & when they changed ye Saterday into Sondaye / of eting dayes fasting dayes / of mery and glad dayes to marye in / they can make so∣rowfull dayes forbiddinge maryages. They haue changed gods lawes and tur∣ned them into their owne tradiciōs to be kept aboue Gods preceptis. And as for their owne lawes they will change & bre∣ke them when they lyste. And this powr shal anticrist haue whether it be for long or shorte tyme. For so miche sowneth the Hebrew phrase / which is for a tyme / a lyt∣le whyle / & half a tyme / signifyinge that Anticryst shall make lawes to stande as long and as shorte tyme as he listeth and the tymes will he order / sett and change at his owne plesur. But is it not onely ye office of god to chang tymes and lawes? Here is therfore the prophecye fulfylled of him. Euen to exalt himselfe aboue all thing that god is called. This text. But the hyghe saynts he shall tangle trappe & destroye and arrogantly thinke to chan∣ge the tymes and lawes &c. is of diuerse lerned men diuersely translated. ..." - The exposicion of Daniel the prophete gathered oute of Philip Melanchton, Iohan Ecolampadius, Chonrade Pellicane [and] out of Iohan Draconite. [et] c. By George Ioye. A prophecye diligently to be noted of al emprowrs [and] kinges in these laste dayes​

 

[coconut theology]

... "Christians" fled to Pella ...

Ah yes, fleeing to Pella! God's providence:

Mat_24:20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:​

Historical works:

""The Jewish converts, or, as they were afterwards called, the Nazarenes, who had laid the foundations of the church, soon found themselves overwhelmed by the increasing multitudes, that from all the various religions of polytheism enlisted under the banner of Christ . . . The Nazarenes retired from the ruins of Jerusalem to the little town of Pella beyond the Jordan, where that ancient church languished above sixty years in solitude and obscurity." - The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire, chapter 15 by Edward Gibbon - Chapter 15 of 'The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire'

"... The death of the rest of the Apostles was plotted in numerous ways and they were driven from the land of Judea, and they went their way to teach the Gospel among all nations, supported by the power of Christ, who said to them: “Going teach ye all nations in my name. But the people of the Church at Jerusalem were commanded by an oracle given out by revelation before the war to esteemed men there to depart from the city and to inhabit a city of Peraea which they called Pella. Those who believed in Christ migrated to this city from Jerusalem, that, when holy men had entirely abandoned the royal capital of the Jews and the entire land of Judaea, the judgment of God might soon overtake them for their many crimes against Christ and His Apostles and utterly destroy that generation of the wicked from among men. (The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 19: Eusebius on Ecclesiastical History Bk.3, Ch.5:6-8). ...

... 8. In northern Perea, beyond Jordan, within the territory of Herod Agrippa II. Epiphanius (De Pond. et Mens. 15) also mentions this flight of the Christians to Pella. The people in the vicinity of Pella were for the greater part Gentiles." - Ecclesiastical History, Books 1–5 (The Fathers of the Church, Volume 19)​

Notice in Acts:

Act 8:1 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.

Act 8:4 Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word.
​

What were the Christians, Jews and Gentiles, doing:

Act_13:14 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.

Act_13:27 For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him.

Act_13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.

Act_13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

Act 14:15 And saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein:

Act 14:16 Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways.

Act 15:19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

Act_15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

Act_16:13 And on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted thither.

Act_17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

Just as Jesus had done:

Luk_4:16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.​

Act_18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

Act 18:11 And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.

(a year and six months, 78 sabbaths)
​

All this in fulfilment of Isaiah 56:1-8, see John 10:16, etc.

 

[3rdAngel]

Ok 24 pages latter and no one can show that Sunday is "THE LORDS DAY" according to the scriptures. Also there is not one scriptures in all the bible that says God's 4th commandment has been abolished and we are now commanded to keep Sunday as a Holy day. If there is no scripture that says Sunday is "THE LORDS DAY" why do people think "SUNDAY is "THE LORDS DAY?

 

[3rdAngel]

Most helpful.

View attachment 36923

In fact, they have an entire counterfeit 'sanctuary' system going on in the Mass.

I actually think what we are discussing at the moment is related to this topic. The "LORDS DAY" controversy leads right into changing times of laws of DANIEL 7:25 and the ANTICHRIST. This may be a good topic for a new thread

 

[coconut theology]

I actually think what we are discussing at the moment is related to this topic. The "LORDS DAY" controversy leads right into changing times of laws of DANIEL 7:25 and the ANTICHRIST. This may be a good topic for a new thread

In this thread, has it been discussed that the Sabbath is the Father's sign?

 

[metis]

Johann Albrecht Bengel (1687-1725), "early became convinced that the Pope was the predicted Antichrist." Through his books which were translated into many languages, he had a strong influence upon a number of people, including Wesley.

John Wesley (1703-1791), founder of Methodism, whose ministry has affected the lives of multiplied thousands, believed the man of sin had found fulfilment in the "Romish Papacy." (Wesley, 'Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament', pp.290).

In 1754, Wesley wrote these words concerning the Papacy: "He is in an emphatical sense, the Man of Sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled the Son of Perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers... He it is... that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped... claiming the highest power, and highest honour... claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone." (quoted in the 'Antichrist and His Ten Kingdoms', p.110).

Froom sums up the evidence in these words: "We have seen the remarkable unanimity of belief of Reformation leaders in every land that the Antichrist of prophecy is not to be a single individual - some sort of superman - who will wrack and well-nigh wreck the world just before the second advent of Christ. Instead, they found that it was a vast system of apostasy, or rather, an imposing counterfeit of truth which had developed within the jurisdiction of that divinely appointed custodian of truth, the Christian Church." (Froom, vol.2, p.793).

A number of notable books on the Papal Antichrist were written during the centuries that followed the Reformation. We will mention two: 'Roman Antichrist', written in 1612 by Andreas Helwig of Berlin (the first according to Froom, as well as Elliott, to link the number 666 with the Papal designation "Vicarius Filii Dei") and 'Dissertations on the Prophecies', written by Thomas Newton in 1748, which showed that the prophecy of the man of sin had found fulfilment in the Roman Papacy.

This same point was emphasised in the Protestant Creeds. The 'Westminster Confession of Faith' used by the Church of England and later by the Presbyterian Church says: "There is no other Head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ, nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof, but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and Son of Perdition, that exalteth himself in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God." (Chapter 25, Section 6). This same basic statement, with difference only in wording, is found in the 'Savoy Declaration' of the Congregational Church, the 'Baptist Confession' of 1689, and in the 'Philadelphia Confession of Faith'.

The 'Morland Confession' of 1508 and 1535 (which represented the beliefs of the Waldensian Brethren) says in article 8: "That the Antichrist, that man of sin, doth sit in the Temple of God, that is, in the Church, of whom the Prophets, and Christ and His Apostles foretold, admonishing all the godly, to beware of him and his errors, and not suffer themselves to be drawn aside from the Truth."

The Reformation work in Switzerland produced the 'Helvetic Confession' in 1536 in which the Papacy is mentioned as the predicted Antichrist. The Lutheran Statement contained in the 'Smalcald Articles' says: "The Pope is the very Antichrist, who exalteth himself above, and opposeth himself against Christ, because he will not permit Christians to be saved without his power, which, nevertheless, is nothing, and is neither ordained nor commanded by God..." These Creeds represented the belief of multiplied thousands.

As churches were established in America, it was this same view concerning the Papacy that was held. In 1680 the churches of New England drew up a Confession of faith which stated that Jesus Christ is the head of the church and notthe Pope of Rome who is indeed the Antichrist and the Son of Perdition. "This", writes Froom, "was the commonly accepted American position." (Ibid. vol.3, p.111).

As Samuel Lee (1625-1691), a learned minister of New Bristol, Rhode Island, said: "It is agreed among all maintainers of the Evangelical Church that the Roman Pontiff is the Antichrist." (Lee, 'The Cutting Off of the Antichrist', p.1).

John Cotton (1584-1652), a Puritan minister of Plymouth and Boston, taught that REVELATION 13 was a picture of the Papacy. Cotton is regarded as America's first prophetic expositor.

Roger Williams (1603-1683), founder of Rhode Island and pastor of the first Baptist church in America, likewise, spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself... speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws: but he is the son of perdition (2 THESSALONIANS 2)." (Froom, vol.3, p.52).

Cotton Mather (1663-1728), a Congregational theologian, in his book 'Fall of Babylon' asked the question: "Is the Pope of Rome to be looked upon as the Antichrist, whose coming and reigning was foretold in the ancient oracles?" To this he answered: "The oracles of God foretold the rising of an Antichrist in the Christian Church; and in the Pope of Rome, allthe characteristics of that Antichrist are so marvellously answered that if any who read the Scriptures do not see it, there is a marvellous blindness upon them." (Ibid., vol.3, p.113).

Samuel Cooper (1725-1783), while delivering a series of lectures at Harvard, said: "If the Antichrist is not to be found in the chair of St. Peter, he is nowhere to be found." He believed the Antichrist was the succession of bishops in Rome. (Cooper, 'A Discourse on the Man of Sin', p.12).

Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758), a famous revivalist and third president of Princeton, identified the "Pope and his clergy" as the power prophesied in 2 THESSALONIANS, DANIEL 7 and REVELATION 13, and 17. His grandson, Timothy Dwight(1752-1817), also a minister, spoke of how the Popes "have seated themselves in the Church, or temple of God, and shewed that they were God, by assuming powers, which belong only to God: the powers, for instance, of making laws to bind the consciences of men; or pardoning sin; of forming religious establishments; of introducing new laws for the conduct and government of the church... thus have they exalted themselves above all that is called God, or that is worshipped." (Dwight, 'A Sermon Preached at Northampton', p.27).

..............

I believe the same as the early reformers did and that is that the Antichrist and the man of sin as described in the scriptures is the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church (not the people or whom God has many that he is calling out to whorship him in Spirit and in truth).

Hope this is helpful

It is this kind of bigoted trash above that you've cut & pasted that makes me so pleased that I left my fundamentalist Protestant church and joined Catholicism several decades ago. My church doesn't do that any longer because we believe that we are not to attack fellow Christians that believe in Jesus, which is what Jesus and Paul commanded us not to do. Apparently you didn't read their memo on this in the Bible.

 

[3rdAngel]

In this thread, has it been discussed that the Sabbath is the Father's sign?

Yes I think briefly but I am not 100% sure to be honest if it was in this thread or another so please feel free to post your thoughts. If it was posted here it was shown in the scriptures that the Sabbath is a sign from God to his people that he is their God that saves them from their sins. *EXODUS 31:13

 

[3rdAngel]

It is this kind of bigoted trash above that you've cut & pasted that makes me so pleased that I left my fundamentalist Protestant church and joined Catholicism several decades ago. My church doesn't do that any longer because we believe that we are not to attack fellow Christians that believe in Jesus, which is what Jesus and Paul commanded us not to do. Apparently you didn't read their memo on this in the Bible.

I guess telling the truth is seen as an attack by some because if they see truth they are convicted that they are in error. God's Spirit is the Spirit of truth and those who worship God must worship him in Spirit and in truth. No one is worshipping God if they are not following what God says. JESUS says no one is worshipping God by following man made traditions and teachings that break the commandments of God *MATTHEW 15:2-9. Who should we believe; the Word of God or you? Nothing personal but I believe only God's Word is true and we should believe and follow it *ROMANS 3:4; ACTS 5:29

 

[coconut theology]

It is this kind of bigoted trash above that you've cut & pasted that makes me so pleased that I left my fundamentalist Protestant church and joined Catholicism several decades ago. My church doesn't do that any longer because we believe that we are not to attack fellow Christians that believe in Jesus, which is what Jesus and Paul commanded us not to do. Apparently you didn't read their memo on this in the Bible.

Look, give it a break, for Roman Catholicism says much worse about true Protestants, like Luther, etc, even to this day, and including the King James Bible, etc. Do you need me to quote what they say (highest sources with links).

We are addressing, as they were, the theology, faith and practice, and the "man of sin" as identified by scripture. It is not derogatory, nor bigoted, to point out that which is identified in prophecy in scripture. Therefore respond to the facts of the statements, rather than try to dismiss the statements.

What in Roman Catholicism (or simply catholicism) appealed to you to leave your fundamentalist Protestant upbringing (what if I may ask)?

 

[coconut theology]

Revelation 1:10:

Rev 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

Rev 1:10 εγενομην εν πνευματι εν τη κυριακη ημερα και ηκουσα οπισω μου φωνην μεγαλην ως σαλπιγγος

Rev 1:10 I wasG1096 inG1722 the SpiritG4151 onG1722 theG3588 Lord'sG2960 day,G2250 andG2532 heardG191 behindG3694 meG3450 a greatG3173 voice,G5456 asG5613 of a trumpet,G4536

Rev 1:10 εγενομηνG1096 V-2ADI-1S ενG1722 PREP πνευματιG4151 N-DSN ενG1722 PREP τηG3588 T-DSF κυριακηG2960 A-DSF ημεραG2250 N-DSF καιG2532 CONJ ηκουσαG191 V-AAI-1S οπισωG3694 ADV μουG1473 P-1GS φωνηνG5456 N-ASF μεγαληνG3173 A-ASF ωςG5613 ADV σαλπιγγοςG4536 N-GSF​

The word "κυριακη" (translit. "kuriake") is an Adjective - Dative - Singular - Feminine. This means it is being used as a 'possessive' ("of", see 1 Corinthians 11:20, "the Lord's supper"), which means the "day" in context belongs to "the Lord". It is literally "the Lord's (belonging to) day". This means, that the "day" in context is uniquely "the Lord's" out of all the 7 days of the week, for the day under consideration is that which exists within the week, as a day which repeats weekly. This is extremely important, as those who incorrectly assume it to mean "the first [day] of the week" in lieu of Jesus' resurrection, cannot get a weekly occurrence out of a one-time event, in fulfilment of typology of the Firstfruit/Wavesheaf in Leviticus 23:9-14, as made known in 1 Corinthians 15:20,23..

This is not as the phrase "day of the Lord" (ἡμέρα κυρίου) which is written in the genitive masculine case (see 2 Peter 3:10, etc, and also so called septuaginta uses).

In Latin, we see it similarly used in Exodus 20 (Latin is without the definite article, as Latin does not use definite articles):

Rev 1:10 fui in spiritu in dominica die et audivi post me vocem magnam tamquam tubae

Exo 20:8 memento ut diem sabbati sanctifices
Exo 20:9 sex diebus operaberis et facies omnia opera tua
Exo 20:10 septimo autem die sabbati Domini Dei tui non facies omne opus tu et filius tuus et filia tua servus tuus et ancilla tua iumentum tuum et advena qui est intra portas tuas
Exo 20:11 sex enim diebus fecit Dominus caelum et terram et mare et omnia quae in eis sunt et requievit in die septimo idcirco benedixit Dominus diei sabbati et sanctificavit eum
​

Which is akin to Genesis' "God's day":

Gen 2:1 igitur perfecti sunt caeli et terra et omnis ornatus eorum
Gen 2:2 conplevitque Deus die septimo opus suum quod fecerat et requievit die septimo ab universo opere quod patrarat
Gen 2:3 et benedixit diei septimo et sanctificavit illum quia in ipso cessaverat ab omni opere suo quod creavit Deus ut faceret
​

Whereas the differing apocalyptic day, "the day of the Lord" in Latin is "dies Domini" as in Zephaniah 1:14:

Zep 1:14 iuxta est dies Domini magnus iuxta et velox nimis vox diei Domini amara tribulabitur ibi fortis
​

In Isaiah 58:13, we read of a "day" that "the Lord" specifically calls "my day":

Isa 58:13 If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words:​

In many translations of Isaiah 58:13 we read that the 7th day, the sabbath of the Lord, is said to be "the Lord's holy day", with the word holy being another adjective, while the "Lord's" is possessive. - /Isaiah 58:13 - Bible Gateway

Thus when reading Isaiah 58:13 with simple pronoun substitution, it would read "... the ... [Lord's] day ...", just as it does in Exodus 20:8-11.

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Exo 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.​

In Genesis we see why this day is uniquely "Gods'", or "the Lord's" day, for in it God rested. This is the reason Jesus could say:

Mat 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.​

For in that He created in Genesis, and rested, Colossians 1:16.

Further, we can see some honest persons, among the many commentators that like to simply assume their apriori into the text, or to place future definition back into the text, from non-scriptural materials.

Peter Pett's commentary makes this accurate note:

"... Sunday is not called ‘the Lord’s day’ (he kyriake hemera) anywhere in Scripture ..." .​

Dr. Thomas Constable likewise states the same truth:

"... The New Testament writers never called Sunday the Lord"s day elsewhere in Scripture. ..." .​

Richard Chenevix Trench has stated on record, and accurately that:

"... “Some have assumed, from this passage, that ἡμέρα κυριακή was a designation of Sunday already familiar among Christians. This, however, seems a mistake ..." .
​

Likewise, Foy E Wallace states:

"... It is not a reference to the first day of the week ..." .​