This blog site is devoted to the defence of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, by exposing the false and invalid Second Vatican Council as a non-Catholic heretical Council. We have zeroed in on the one piece of arsenal which most of us have overlooked and failed to employ over these past 40 years since the Vatican II sect was installed in Rome. The one weapon that strikes more terror into the enemies of the Church is the Bulla of Pope Pius II, Execrabilis, which he issued on February 15th, 1460.
Part 1: "The Antichrist sitteth in the Temple of God"
"The Bible predicts that the Antichrist will sit in the Temple of God. 2 Thess 2:3-4. "Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposeth and is lifted up above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God."
But, what is the Temple of God?
Fr. Herman Kramer was a Catholic priest who spent 30 years studying and writing a book on the Apocalypse. In his book he wrote the following about St. Paul's prophecy concerning the Antichrist sitting in the temple of God. "St. Paul says that the Antichrist sitteth in the temple of God ..."
'The Temple of God' - St. Peters in Rome
This is not the ancient Temple of Jerusalem, nor a temple like it built by Antichrist, as some have thought, for then it would be his own temple ... this temple is shown to be a Catholic church, possibly one of the churches in Jerusalem, or St. Peter's in Rome, which is the largest church in the world, and is in the fullest sense 'The temple of God.'"
Fr. Kramer astutely points out that in order for the Antichrist to sit in the temple of God, as Sacred Scripture says, he must sit in a Catholic Church. In fact, he must sit in the most prominent Catholic Church in the world, which has been hijacked and overtaken by the Antichrist and his supporters.
The Antichrist will not and cannot sit in a rebuilt temple of Jerusalem as many have thought, because this would certainly not be the temple of God, but Antichrist's own temple.
"The Antichrist sitteth ..."
The Antichrist must sit in St. Peters in Rome, the largest Christian Church in the world and the very spot where the first pope, St. Peter was buried, and the fact that the Antichrist will sit in Rome is precisely what the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God has also predicted.
On September 19, 1846, the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared in La Salette, France and foretold that "Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist. The Church will be in eclipse."
Our Lady specifically predicted that Rome will lose the Catholic faith, fall into apostasy from the true Church of Christ and become the seat of the Antichrist. And the similarity between Our Lady's prophecy and the Bible's prophecy about the Antichrist sitting in the temple of God is unmistakeable.
Antichrist sitting in the temple of God
Both the Bible and Our Lady are clearly telling us that the Antichrist will have his seat in the temple of God in Rome.
In this video we will bring forward the evidence that the Antichrist is sitting in the temple of God in Rome, right now, just as was predicted by St. Paul and Our Lady of La Salette, and the fact that the Antichrist is sitting in the temple of God in Rome, does not disprove the authenticity of the Catholic Church or imply that the Gates of Hell have prevailed against the one Church established by Jesus Christ.
On the contrary, the fact that the Antichrist is sitting in a Church in Rome, proves that the Catholic Church is the temple of God, the one true Church of Christ, whose members the Antichrist wishes to deceive, whose traditions he wishes to destroy, whose Mass he wishes to replace and whose faith he wishes to eliminate.
Part 2: The Antichrist defined
In all of Sacred Scripture the word "Antichrist" is mentioned only four times. Out of the four times that St. John uses the word "Antichrist," he only defines it twice.
The two definitions that St. John gives for the definition of Antichrist are the most important pieces of evidence that exists in identifying who the Antichrist actually is, because Sacred Scripture is the inspired, infallible and inerrant Word of God. Therefore, Sacred Scripture's definition of Antichrist is infallibly the correct one.
1 John 2:22. "Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son."
1 John 4:2-3. Every spirit which confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God: And every spirit that dissolveth Jesus is not of God: and this is Antichrist."
Both definitions of Antichrist deal with a denial of the truth about who Jesus Christ is. The truth about Our Lord Jesus Christ and the truth about the Most Holy Trinity are the very foundations of the Christian religion. They're the most important truths in the universe.
Antichrist JPII
This is why the early Councils of the Catholic Church condemned with the utmost vigour even the slightest deviation from the truth about Jesus Christ or the Trinity. And, this is why the greatest enemies of Jesus Christ in history were not those men who caused Jesus Christ's followers temporal harm, but those who were the most effective and blasphemous in attacking the truth about Jesus Christ, which is the very foundation of one's eternal salvation.
Antichrist
Thus, in defining Antichrist, Sacred Scripture refers to a specific attack on the truth about Jesus Christ, a specific attack on the truth about the God-man. Sacred Scripture refers specifically about the dissolving of Jesus (1 John 4:2-3), and the denial that Jesus is the Christ (1 John 2:22).
These two things serve as the distinguishing characteristic of the Antichrist according to Sacred Scripture, and these two things clearly refer to an attack on the truth about the Incarnation of the Son of God.
One of the first and most notorious men in Church history to pervert the doctrine of the Incarnation was the 5th century heretic, Nestorius, who was condemned by the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D.
Nestorius the heretic
The case of the heretic, Nestorius is incredibly important in identifying the Antichrist as we will see, because Nestorius' heresy was the specific heresy which fits the Bible's definition for Antichrist.
Pope Pius XI's encyclical
Nestorius was the heretic who tried to dissolve Jesus as Sacred Scripture says; 1 John 4: 2-3, and he did so by perverting the truth of the Incarnation. Pope Pius XI, Encyclical, Lux Veritatis (#37), Sept., 21 , 1931. "... All these, no less than Nestorius, make a temerarious attempt to DISSOLVE CHRIST. ..."
Pope Pius XI, here confirmed that Nestorius' heresy was the specific doctrine of Antichrist. It was an attempt to dissolve the person of Jesus Christ, which is the mark of the Antichrist, according to Sacred Scripture.
But what was this doctrine of Nestorius? How did Nestorius dissolve Jesus and in doing so, become what St. John defines as Antichrist?
The Incarnation
In order to understand Nestorius' doctrine we must very briefly repeat the Catholic truth about the Incarnation. The Catholic Church teaches that the Eternal Word, the Son of God, the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity assumed a human nature and truly became a man: St. John 1:14. "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us."
Our Lord Jesus Christ is the Eternal Word made flesh. He is truly God and He is also truly man. He is one Christ, one Divine Person with two natures. Pope Leo the Great, Council of Chalcedon, 451, ex cathedra, " ... Our Lord Jesus Christ: the same perfect in divinity but perfect in humanity in a single person and subsistent being: He is not parted or divided into two persons ..."
Pope Leo the Great
But, Nestorius rejected that Our Lord Jesus Christ is one person. Nestorius blasphemously dissolved Jesus into two persons. Nestorius blasphemously held that the Son of God did not become man in the Incarnation, but rather that the Son of God united Himself , in a certain way with a man named Jesus. I repeat, Nestorius did not hold that the Son of God became man in the Incarnation, but rather that the Son of God united Himself in a certain way with a man named Jesus.
Does that sound familiar? Antipope John Paul II, Redemptor Hominis (#13), 1979: "By his incarnation, he, the son of God, in a certain way united himself with each man."
Antipope John Paul II, Homily, July 2, 1986: " the Son of God, incarnate in the womb of the Virgin Mary, "has in a certain way united himself with each man."
Antipope John Paul II, Homily, April 8, 1987: "by his incarnation the Son of God has united himself in a certain way with each person."
Antipope John Paul II, Letter to Families (#2): "the Son of God, who in the Incarnation "united himself in some sense with every man."
And, by holding that the Son of God did not become man, but rather united himself with a man named Jesus in the Incarnation, Nestorius dissolved or divided Our Lord Jesus Christ into two persons.
Pope St. Leo the Great, Dogmatic Letter to Flavian [449]: "Let Nestorius therefore, be anathematized ... he made one person of the flesh, and another of the Godhead, AND DID NOT PERCEIVE THAT THERE WAS BUT ONE CHRIST ..."
And by dissolving or dividing Our Lord Jesus Christ into two persons, Nestorius' antichrist doctrine logically resulted in the worship of two Christs, and introduced as a consequence the worship of man.
Pope Virgilius, Second Council of Constantinople, 553. "The holy Synod of Ephesus ... has pronounced sentence against the heresy of Nestorius ... and all those who might later adopt the same opinions as he held ... they express these falsehoods against the true dogmas of the Church, OFFERING WORSHIP TO TWO SONS, trying to divide that which cannot be divided, AND INTRODUCING TO BOTH HEAVEN AND EARTH THE OFFENCE OF THE WORSHIP OF MAN, But the sacred band of heavenly spirits worship along with us only on Lord Jesus Christ."
In this incredible quotation, the dogmatic Second Council of Constantinople teaches that the blasphemous dissolving of Jesus into two persons by Nestorius' view of the Incarnation, resulted in the worship of two Sons, and introduced, as a consequence, the worship of Man.
I repeat, Nestorius' heretical view of the Incarnation resulted in the worship of two Sons, and introduced, as a consequence, the worship of Man. This was the very doctrine described by St. John, as the doctrine of the Antichrist.
..... I haven't forgotten ...just been a bit busy lately!
