Unanswered Questions for WMSCOG Members

As another year comes to a close and I reflect back, I recall a World Mission Society Church of God member who asked me to make a list of questions I thought the WMSCOG had "failed to answer or ran away from."

Unfortunately, I have not yet heard back from this person, and these questions remain.

Are there any members who would like to respond? I really would like to know how the WMSCOG explains these issues. Are there any acceptable answers? If so, please share as it will only help people understand the WMSCOG better.

Here are five of my "unanswered questions"...

1. The WMSCOG teaches that everyone who takes the Passover with them will be protected from disasters/plagues and will not die (source and example). Ahnsahnghong taught that only a literal 144,000 will go to heaven alive (see chapter 6 in The Mystery of God and the Spring of the Water of Life). There are more than 2 million WMSCOG members who have taken the Passover and are supposedly protected from death. What will happen to all the people who will not die (because they took the Passover), but also will not go to heaven alive (because they are not part of the 144,000)?

2. Why does the WMSCOG sometimes keep the 7th month feasts in the 8th month? Click here for a detailed chart. Please do not answer that it is because of leap years. That is not a valid reason. In the sacred calendar, when leap months are required, they are added at the end of the year to keep the integrity of the 7th month feasts. There must be a different answer.

3. In their teaching about the Antichrist, the WMSCOG makes statements about 10 kingdoms that came out of the Roman Empire, 3 of which were destroyed by the Papacy. They also claim the Ostrogoths were destroyed in AD 538. Why does this not match up with the historical record? Click here for details.

4. In Rev. 5 and 6, the "Lamb" opens the scroll with the seven seals. The WMSCOG teaches that this is Ahnsahnghong revealing the Bible. In order to fully open the scroll, all seven seals must be opened. I've heard the WMSCOG explain that the 6th seal was World War II. What were the historical fulfillments of the other six seals? Click here for more info.

5. Regarding Joseph's dream in Gen. 37 involving the sun and the moon and the stars, the WMSCOG teaches that the sun represents "Father God" and the moon represents "Mother God" (source). In the dream, the sun and the moon are bowing to Joseph. Who does Joseph represent, and why are "Father and Mother" bowing to him?

Proof that the World Mission Society Church of God is False

I wrote previously asking World Mission Society Church of God members to share objective proof that their faith is true.  So far, no one has had any objective proof to offer.

Today, I'm turning the idea around to disproof.  What objective information do we have that proves the WMSCOG to be false?

I want to emphasize the word objective.  We're looking for provable facts here, not feelings, opinions and matters of interpretation.  (Click here for an example of why we can't just go by feelings.)

I love analogies.  It really helps me to understand something if I can see how it relates to or corresponds with something else.  Here's an analogy for you...

A popular movie these days at my house is Disney's "Tangled," the story of Rapunzel.  What I really find interesting as I watch it is the relationship between Rapunzel and Mother Gothel.  It follows so closely with the BITE model of destructive mind control.  As viewers, we can see how Mother Gothel manipulates Rapunzel in the relationship, but Rapunzel just sees it as love and care from her 'mother.'

In reality, Mother Gothel is not her mother at all and is using her for selfish means.  There's one moment, closer to the end of the movie, when Rapunzel finally realizes the truth.  One clue leads to everything unraveling.  What is that one clue?  Rapunzel and the lost princess share the same birthday.  Rapunzel combines that clue with everything else she saw when she escaped isolation (the symbol of the kingdom, the picture of the little princess), and the truth is revealed!

Now back to the WMSCOG.  If none of the other common reasons convince you, then please follow these clues, provable facts, to show you where the so-called 'truth' of the WMSCOG starts unraveling.  Thankfully there are many clues to find, not just one, and I'll list some for you here.

These are all matters of fact and logic and cannot be debated.  (1+1 = 2; can you debate that it doesn't?)  Well, if you'd like to try to debate these facts, go ahead, and I look forward to hearing from you about it.

The WMSCOG teaches that God lies

What do you call a 'God' who acts contrary to the nature of God?  A false god.  (Click here for more information.)

Isaac -- The WMSCOG teaches that Abraham's son Isaac was God in the flesh.  However, Isaac lied (Genesis 26).  God does NOT lie (Titus 1:2).

Ahnsahnghong's own book -- In the book "Problems with New Jerusalem, the Bride, and Women's Veils," Ahnsahnghong said that there was NO 'Mother God' and and specifically argued against the same verses the WMSCOG used today to try to prove there is.  The WMSCOG's position is that Ahnsahnghong wrote the book to prevent his followers from believing in the wrong woman as 'Mother God,' and then withdrew the book so he could reveal the right woman.  There are only two conclusions I can draw from this, neither of which is good for the WMSCOG.  Either:

Ahnsahnghong told the truth in his book, and there is no 'Mother God' (which disproves the WMSCOG) or...
Ahnsahnghong lied in his book, which proves he cannot be God (which also disproves the WMSCOG).

The WMSCOG uses false historical facts

I have been told that these are not actually false facts, but simplifications to avoid lengthy discussions of complicated history.  I understand the need to simplify, but even simplifications can (and should) be accurate.  Build doctrine on false simplifications, and you end up with false doctrine.

The 10 Kingdoms -- As part of the Pope-is-Antichrist doctrine, the WMSCOG teaches that the Roman Empire broke up into 10 countries, 3 of which were destroyed by the Catholic Church by 538.  The supposed 10 kingdoms are not accurate, 5 (not 3) were destroyed, and the kingdoms' religious faith was not a consistent factor.  (Click here and here for more information.)

The year 538 -- Again as part of the Pope-is-Antichrist doctrine, the WMSCOG teaches that the last of the three kingdoms to fall was the Ostrogoths, destroyed in AD 538, which began the prophesied 1260 years of the 'Dark Ages.'  However, the Ostrogoths were destroyed must later than 538, and there is no significance of the year 538 in Papal history either.  (Click here and here for more information.)

The WMSCOG has kept the Feasts incorrectly 
(even according to their own regulations!)

This is an obvious clue for me!  If you are uncertain or confused about it, please click on the link provided for more details.

The Feasts of the seventh month -- According to the WMSCOG, keeping the Feasts of God properly is absolutely essential to your salvation.  The Feast of Trumpets, Day of Atonement, and Feast of Tabernacles must take place on the specified days in the seventh month of the 'sacred calendar.'

But if you examine what has actually been done at the WMSCOG, you'll find that in 2005, 2008, and 2010, the seventh month Feasts were kept in the eighth month.  (Click here for the detailed chart.)  The only word I can think of to describe that is incompetence, and that is definitely not a word to describe God (or a church that claims to be lead by a God-in-the-flesh).

If you are a WMSCOG member, I pray that you will follow these clues to find true freedom in the real Jesus Christ.

Daniel's Prophecy

One of the most impressive things about the Bible (for me, at least) is its record of fulfilled prophecy.  The fulfilled prophecies in the book of Daniel are especially intriguing.

The World Mission Society Church of God uses Daniel's prophecies to amaze their new or potential converts.  What's wrong with this?

First, to the uninformed person, it sounds as if the WMSCOG is sharing a spectacular revelation.  The hearer may think, "Wow!  If the WMSCOG can reveal something so amazing, what else can they tell me about the Bible?  Maybe I should listen to them."  What the hearer may not realize is that this is NOT a revelation that originated with the WMSCOG.  Bible scholars for ages have written about Daniels fulfilled prophecies.

Second, the WMSCOG takes the fulfillment of these prophecies a step too far.  They have withheld the true facts of history in order to force the appearance of a fulfilled prophecy, and the WMSCOG is not the only group who has made this error.

I've already examined this at length regarding the claim that the Papacy is the Antichrist.  But with the WMSCOG's "Evidence Book" in my hand, the errors are so glaring at me that I believe it needs to be revisited.

Many Bible scholars agree that the four kingdoms of Daniel are:

• the Babylonian Empire (head of gold)
• the Medo-Persian Empire (chest and arms of silver)
• the Greek Empire (belly and thighs of copper)
• the Roman Empire (legs of iron)

Note that some identify the four beasts of Daniel 7 the same way, but others divide the Medes and Persians for the second and third beasts, making the Greek Empire the fourth beast.  You can read about that here.  If you need to refresh your memory, here's where you can read Daniel 2 (the dream of the statue) and Daniel 7 (the vision of the four beasts).

It's when we get to the statue's feet and toes partly of iron and partly of clay, and the ten horns of the fourth beast, with the little horn that comes up to subdue three horns... that's where you see a few more differences among the Bible scholars, and that's where the WMSCOG takes a definite wrong turn.

Let's take a look into their "Evidence Book."

On page 154, it says,

Rome exercised its power politically and religiously.  It was divided into ten countries until 476 A.D.
Lombards (Italy)
Franks (France)
Burgundians (Switzerland)
Visigoths (Spain)
Suevi (Portugal)
Alemanni (Germany)
Anglo-Saxons (England)
Vandals, Heruli, and Ostrogoths.

The Lombards did not cross the Danube into Roman territory until the 540s, and did not enter Italy until 568.  (My links for you are from Wikipedia for your convenience, but you can look up this information in any printed history book also.  I can refer you to some if you need it.)

This list of "ten countries" also ignores other tribal groups such as the Bretons, the Bavarians, and the Basques, who show up in various history books and maps, and does not mention that the eastern part of the Roman Empire was still alive and well.  So these "ten countries" are not as clear as they are presented to be.

Then moving on to page 158, we read,

After Rome was divided into ten countries from 351 to 476 A.D., Heruli was destroyed by the Papacy in 493 A.D., Vandals in 534 and Ostrogoths in 538.  The Papacy was established in 538 A.D.  The Papacy fell in 1798 A.D. (Pius VI was forced into exile when French troupes invaded the Vatican.)

The Evidence Book gives paragraphs of information about the end of the Heruli and the Vandals, but only one sentence about the Ostrogoths, on page 159.  It happens to be the line taken from the Wikipedia page about the year 538.

Why didn't they say any more about the Ostrogoths?  Because they were NOT destroyed in 538.  Read about the Gothic War and you'll see that the Ostrogoths put up a fierce and long resistance, and their last king wasn't killed until 553.

Also, the Papacy was NOT "established" in 538, which you can read about here.  There is more information about the dates of 538 and 1798, and their error and misuse, here and here.

One last page to look at, page 175.

This page says that the remaining seven kingdoms accepted Catholicism and swore allegiance to the Pope.  What they haven't told us is that:

• The Anglo-Saxons did not convert to Christianity until the 7th century.
• The Alemanni were conquered and incorporated into the Frankish kingdom in 496, and also did not convert to Christianity until the 7th century.
• The Lombards did not secure their kingdom in Italy until 572.
• The Burgundians were destroyed in 534, and were mostly Catholic by the time they were conquered.
• The Suevi were also eventually conquered in 585, after they had converted to Catholicism.

Therefore, by the time the Ostrogoths were destroyed (in 553, not 538), there were 5 kingdoms conquered, not 3, and one more if you extend the time to 585.

Then near the bottom of the page, under the title "The Dark Ages," they tell us there was the "slaughtering of numerous saints."  According to the WMSCOG's own doctrine, this is impossible because they claim there were no saints during that time.

They also put the development of Protestantism after the supposed fall of the Papacy in 1798.  Protestantism, which began with the Reformation in 1517, was already well developed by then.

I know I've gone over all this in previous posts, but I thought you would like to see it with the pages from the Evidence Book for comparison.

It's quite interesting to study what Bible scholars have to say about this part of Daniel's prophecy.  But do not make the mistake of studying the false 'facts' of the World Mission Society Church of God.

The Pope is NOT the Antichrist - Summary of 'Is 666 the Pope?'

I'm writing this as a summary of my series, "Is 666 the Pope?"  But if you haven't read the series yet, this article would make a great preview for you.

Part 1 of this series examined the sources the World Mission Society Church of God uses to support their claim against the Papacy.   I saw that they continue to have problems (like they did with their claims about the cross):

• misrepresenting information by taking it out of context
• presenting (or inventing?) 'facts' that are not in the referenced resource
• not being specific enough with their source so it can be verified
• selecting some information but neglecting to mention other important information from the same source

Part 2 established my focus, since the WMSCOG claims the Pope is the Antichrist whose number is 666.  Rather than looking at the general definition of an antichrist, I narrowed in on the Antichrist from Revelation 13, the beast from the sea whose number is 666.  In other words, the question became, "Is the Pope (Papacy) this Antichrist?" rather than "Is the Pope an antichrist?"

Then I examined the Scriptures and history to see how they matched up with the claims of the Pope-is-Antichrist teaching.  Scripture and the historical record give plenty of evidence to show that the Pope-is-Antichrist teaching is false, especially when combined with the particular doctrine of the World Mission Society Church of God.

Here is a summary of those claims compared to reality, and in relation to Revelation 13:

Rev. 13:1-2  The beast has 7 heads with 10 horns and 10 crowns.

similar to Dan. 7:7-8, 20, 24  The beast had 10 horns, and another little horn came up among them and plucked out 3 of the first horns.
Claim: When the Roman Kingdom fell, it split into 10 kingdoms.  Three of those kingdoms did not follow the doctrine of the Catholic Church and were subdued (or destroyed) because of that.  The last of them (Ostrogoths) was destroyed in A.D. 538.
Reality: When the Roman Kingdom fell, many kingdoms arose from it, but not the same kingdoms (or the same number) as claimed.  The Ostrogoths were still strongly defending themselves after 538 and were not defeated until 553.  By then, of the claimed 10 kingdoms, 5 kingdoms (not 3) had been subdued, and 1 of the kingdoms still had not entered Roman territory.  Also, adherence to Catholic doctrine was not a factor in whether or not a kingdom was conquered.
Read Part 3 for detailed information.

Rev. 13:3-4  The beast suffered a fatal wound that was healed.

Claim:  The papacy suffered a "deadly wound" in 1798 when the Pope was captured by Napoleon's general.  The wound has been healing since then.
Reality:  There are many occasions in the history of the Catholic Church that could be considered "deadly wounds" that have healed.  The verse implies only one fatal wound, not a series of struggles.  There is no reason to pick the particular wound of 1798 over any other.
Read Part 4 for detailed information.

Rev. 13:5  The beast was given authority to rule for 42 months

Claim:  This 42 months is 1260 days, which prophetically mean 1260 years.  The rule of the Catholic Church (papacy) began in 538 and continued until the "deadly wound" in 1798--exactly 1260 years as prophesied.
Reality:  There are several years that could be considered the beginning of the rule of the Catholic Church, but 538 is not one of them.  Significant historical markers of the Catholic Church do not fit into a prophecy of 1260 years.  Also, events that were supposed to be happening during these 1260 years would contradict other World Mission Society Church of God doctrine.
Read Part 5 and Part 6 for detailed information.

Rev. 13:6 / Dan. 7:25  The beast speaks blasphemy and tries to change the times and law.

Claim:  The Pope is made equal with God, and Catholic priests are said to forgive sin.  Both of those are examples of blasphemy.  The Catholic Church has changed the sacred calendar (substituting Sunday for Saturday Sabbath, Easter for Passover, instituting Christmas) and has tried to change God's law (omitting and changing some of the 10 Commandments).
Reality:  Official Catholic doctrine does not support the charge of blasphemy.  Calendar issues are dealt with in other posts on this blog.  The 10 Commandments are actually composed of 14 command statements.  The Catholic Church still holds to all 10 Commandments, but they have combined them differently.
Read Part 7 for detailed information.

Rev. 13:18  The number of the beast is 666.

Claim:  The Pope's mitre is inscribed with the title "Vicarius Filii Dei."  When you add up the values of the Roman numerals in this title, the total equals 666.
Reality:  There are many people whose names can add up to 666, depending on the method of computation.  Since the Catholic Church doesn't match the description of the beast as claimed, it doesn't matter whether or not Vicarius Filii Dei is an official title of the Pope or what number it forms.
Read Part 8 for detailed information.

Conclusion: The 1260 years in the prophecy more likely refers to a future, literal 3 1/2 year time period.  Could a Pope of the Catholic Church fulfill the prophecies of the beast in the future?  Possibly, but so could many other world leaders.  We can only speculate when thinking about the future.  The theory of the Catholic Church already fulfilling the prophecies of the Antichrist fails.

---

A Personal Note

To tell you the truth, when I started researching for this series I didn't know what I would find.  I am not Catholic.  I wasn't very motivated to clear the Pope (and Roman Catholic Church) from these accusations of being the Antichrist, the beast whose number is 666.  I had heard the claim before, had even read the specific reasons, and thought it was a bit intriguing, but that's as far as I got.  I didn't think it really mattered to me.

The main reason I decided to research the claims was because some of you readers wrote and asked me (thank you for that!).  Now that I've done the research, I'm glad I did--not just because of the facts I've found, but also because I've learned something very important:

When you are confronted with a sensational claim such as this, don't just accept someone else's "research" about it--do your own!

I can't believe this accusation has persisted despite history proving it false!  It's kind of like the claims that Elvis is still alive or that the moon landings were all a hoax or that the Holocaust was a myth.  They are false, yet the rumors won't quit!  It's infuriating!  If you can help spread the truth about the Pope not being the Antichrist, please do.  Whatever your personal opinions are of the Catholic Church, they should not be falsely accused in this way.

Is 666 the Pope? - Part 8 - The Number of the Beast

Again, here is a reference for you of the Pope-is-Antichrist teaching.

One more thing to examine...
Today, the number of the beast:
Revelation 13:18

and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.  Here is wisdom.  Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666.

We should note that some scholars think this number was originally 616, not 666.  You can see this in the footnotes of these Bibles: New American Standard Bible, New Living Translation, New Century Version, Lexham English Bible, Holman Christian Standard Bible, and the English Standard Version.  For more information about 616, visit Wikipedia Number of the Beast or read this news article.

That's very interesting.  However, in deciphering whether or not the Pope is the beast, it does not matter if the number is 616 or 666, and I'll show you why in a moment.  First let's see how the Pope-is-Antichrist teaching comes up with 666 for the Pope.

They say that there is a title inscribed in the Pope's mitre, Vicarius Filii Dei, which is Latin for "Vicar of the Son of God."  (I've heard people debating whether this is actually one of the Pope's titles, and whether it is actually inscribed in the mitre, but that also does not matter.)

They look at the letters of Vicarius Filii Dei, pull out those that are also Roman numerals, and add them up, like this:

V	I	C	A	R	I	U(V)	S	F	I	L	I	I	D	E	I
5	1	100			1	5			1	50	1	1	500		1

The total is 666.  Look at who else adds up to 666:

Ellen Gould White, co-founder of the Seventh Day Adventist church (add the "W" as "V V")

E	L	L	E	N	G	O	U(V)	L	D	W(V V)	H	I	T	E
	50	50					5	50	500	10		1

I was told that Ahnsahnghong was baptized by the Seventh Day Adventists, and the World Mission Society Church of God shares many similarities with Seven Day Adventist doctrine.  Interesting.

But who is to say what pattern, code, or formula is to be used in adding the number?  Depending on how you figure it, these people (and more) all have names that add to 666:
The Roman Emperor Nero
Napoleon Bonaparte
Adolf Hitler
Ronald Reagan
Bill Gates
(source)
and Prince Charles of Wales (source)

Do you think any of these people are (were) the beast, the Antichrist?  It takes more than the number of a name to identify the Antichrist, doesn't it?

Imagine your boss tells you a client has just landed at the airport and you must go pick her up.  He just talked to her on the phone, and he'll give you a description, so you don't have to waste any time in finding her.  Here's the description:
long, brown hair
wearing glasses
dressed in a black skirt suit
carrying a red suitcase
and her name is Maria.

If you spot a woman with glasses and a red suitcase, but she has short, blonde hair and is wearing blue jeans--do you have to ask for her name before knowing if she's the one you're looking for?  No, she already doesn't match the description.

That's why it doesn't matter whether or not the beast's number is 616 or 666, or whether or not Vicarius Filii Dei is an actual title of the Pope.  The Catholic Church already doesn't match the description of the beast, even by the Pope-is-Antichrist teaching's own description.

Likewise, with all those people whose names can add to the right number, the number of someone's name doesn't matter if they don't otherwise match the description of the beast.

Almost done, see you next time...

Click here for Part 9, the summary.

Is 666 the Pope? - Part 7 - Words and Laws

Once again, here is a reference for you of the Pope-is-Antichrist teaching.

Already my study has convinced me that the Pope is NOT the Antichrist, but there are a few more descriptions of the beast that we should look at, just for the sake of completeness.

The words of the beast:
Revelation 13:5-6

And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven.

The beast speaks blasphemy.  John 10:33 says that claiming to be God is blasphemy.  Luke 5:21 says that claiming to forgive sins is blasphemy.  (You can always say, "I forgive you" to someone who offends you, but Luke 5:21 is talking about sin in a broader sense.)

The Pope-is-Antichrist teachers show quotes from Catholic sources that apparently show that they believe and teach the Pope is equal to God, and that the priests actually forgive sins.  Here is a short list of quotes that they commonly use.

The problem here is that these original resources are very difficult to track down and check.  I cannot tell for certain one way or the other regarding the claimed quotes, but I can look at the Catholic Church's official doctrine.

About whether the Pope is equal with God, the Catholic Encyclopedia says,

"Whatsoever thou shalt bind . . . Whatsoever thou shalt loose" [Matt. 16:19]; nothing is withheld. Further, Peter's authority is subordinated to no earthly superior. The sentences which he gives are to be forthwith ratified in heaven. They do not need the antecedent approval of any other tribunal. He is independent of all save the Master [Jesus] who appointed him. The words as to the power of binding and loosing are, therefore, elucidatory of the promise of the keys which immediately precedes. They explain in what sense Peter is governor and head of Christ's kingdom, the Church, by promising him legislative and judicial authority in the fullest sense.

About forgiveness of sins, the Catechism of the Catholic Church says,

1441 Only God forgives sins. [Mk 2:7] Since he is the Son of God, Jesus says of himself, "The Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins" and exercises this divine power: "Your sins are forgiven." [Mk 2:5,10; Lk 7:48] Further, by virtue of his divine authority he gives this power to men to exercise in his name. [Jn 20:21-23]

1442 Christ has willed that in her prayer and life and action his whole Church should be the sign and instrument of the forgiveness and reconciliation that he acquired for us at the price of his blood. But he entrusted the exercise of the power of absolution to the apostolic ministry which he charged with the "ministry of reconciliation." [2 Cor 5:18] The apostle is sent out "on behalf of Christ" with "God making his appeal" through him and pleading: "Be reconciled to God." [2 Cor 5:20]

The official church position is that the Pope is God's appointed head of the church on earth, not that the Pope is God Himself.  Also, the official church position is that while only God forgives sins, He gives authority to priests to forgive sins in His name--not that the priests themselves forgive sins by their own authority.

I've seen already how unreliable the WMSCOG and other Pope-is-Antichrist teachers have been in their handling of other resources.  IF they had shown integrity with their other research, I would be more inclined to give them the benefit of doubt on this one.  But it's highly likely that the quotes they use have also been taken out of context and aren't what they appear.

The claims that the Pope and the Catholic Church speak blasphemy are, at best, inconclusive.


Changing the laws and times:
This is in Daniel, not Revelation
Daniel 7:25

...[He] shall intend to change times and law....

To the WMSCOG, this includes the 10 Commandments, the Sabbath, Passover/Easter, Christmas, etc., which they say were laws and times changed by the Catholic Church.

I address the Sabbath, Passover/Easter, and Christmas elsewhere on my blog.  In short, these are not "laws" that the church says you must keep to be saved.  The Catholic Church does not condemn anyone to hell for not observing Christmas, for example.  Neither do any other Protestant churches I know.

Regarding the 10 Commandments, the Roman Catholic Church is accused of omitting the second commandment, severely shortening the fourth commandment, and splitting the tenth commandment into two.

The 10 Commandments first appear in Exodus 20.  It's interesting that although the phrase "10 Commandments" is used a few times in the Bible, it's not in Exodus 20 (except by the translator's notes).  Did you realize in Exodus 20:1-17, God says:
"You shall (or shall not)..." 12 times,
"Remember..." once, and
"Honor..." once
That's a total of 14 commands in what we call the 10 Commandments.  We combine some to make a total of 10.  Interesting, isn't it?

Yes, the Catholic Church does number the commandments differently from most other churches.  You can see that in a chart here.  BUT they did not change the commandments, they just combined them differently.

The Catholic Church did not "omit" the second commandment.  They combined it with the first commandment.  The words are still there, just grouped differently.  Read it here in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  If you read Ex. 20:3 and Ex. 20:4-5, you can see that those commands are very similar--do not worship anything or anyone but God.  It is easy to combine them.

The Catholic Church's purpose for showing the division between their 9th and 10th commandments (about coveting) is stated here in the Catechism.  They wanted the people to know that both carnal (lustful) desires and material coveting are sins.  Most other churches combine the statements about coveting into a single 10th commandment, but it's easy to see why they may also be split.

As for the commandment about the Sabbath.  The Pope-is-Antichrist teaching claims that the Catholic Church shortened it from "94 words to eight." (source)  A reading of the Catechism of the Catholic Church shows that to be inaccurate.  It is much longer than 8 words, but I'll let you do the counting if it's that important to you.  You can read it here, and here are more details.

I disagree with the WMSCOG.  I do not believe the Catholic Church fulfills this prophecy.

I'm almost done with my study of the beast of Revelation.  Next time, the number of the beast.

Click here to go on to Part 8.

Is 666 the Pope? - Part 6 - The 1260 Days Continued

Just as a reminder, here is a resource for you to refer to about the Pope-is-Antichrist teaching.

Last time in Part 5, we saw how the World Mission Society Church of God set the beginning year for the prophecy of the 1260 days (years) at A.D. 538, it being the year the Ostrogoths were "destroyed by the Papacy."  And we saw that statement was not based on historical fact.

There is another claim about the year 538 that should be addressed.  The Pope-is-Antichrist teaching says this is also the year Emperor Justinian decreed the Bishop of Rome to be head over all the churches (government merging with the church) and "Vigilius ascended the papal chair in 538 AD under the military protection of Brasilius [Belisarius]." (source)

Is this a true fact?  Did Justinian install Viligius as Pope in 538, thereby changing "Pagan Rome" into "Papal Rome"? 

No. While Vigilius may have been appointed by Justinian, he became Pope in 537, not 538.  Also, the Pragmatic Sanction of Justinian giving the Pope official sanction to run civil affairs in Rome on behalf of the Byzantine Empire was not issued until August 554.  So you see, there is still no historical basis to use the year 538.

That was enough to convince me that the prophecy of 1260 days was NOT fulfilled by the Catholic Church from the years 538-1798.

But just in case you are still not sure, look at what else is to happen during these 1260 days:

Daniel 7:21

I was watching; and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them  

Daniel 7:25

... the saints shall be given into his hand
    For a time and times and half a time.

Revelation 13:5,7

5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue [make war] for forty-two months.... 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.

The beast makes war against the saints (the people of God) during this time.
This is a big problem for the World Mission Society Church of God in particular, because according to their other doctrine there were NO saints during the time period of 538-1798!

The WMSCOG teaches that salvation was unattainable from approximately 325 to 1948.  Why?  Because according to the WMSCOG, the Passover (the key to salvation...or at least one of the requirements) "was abolished at the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325 ... [and] completely disappeared from the world," and was not restored until Ahnsahnghong came in 1948. (source)  I checked this with a WMSCOG deaconess, and she confirmed that, according to their doctrine, NO ONE was saved during this approximate time frame.

How is it possible for the beast to make war on the saints, when there are no saints?

Here's something else that is to happen during these days:

Revelation 11:2

But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.

 The Holy City is Jerusalem.  For the WMSCOG, Jerusalem may refer to "Heavenly Mother Jerusalem" or "Mother God" (Zahng Gil-Jah).  They might also consider the Holy City to refer to Zion, which to them means the place where the feasts of God are kept, which to them means the World Mission Society Church of God.

In other words, to the WMSCOG, this prophecy could be fulfilled by the "trampling underfoot" of the literal Jerusalem, "Mother God," or themselves.

Were any of those trampled underfoot for the years 538 to 1798?  No.  Jerusalem has had its share of problems, but they are not limited to 538-1798, and the WMSCOG Zions and Zahng Gil-Jah did not exist yet.

In that case, could it be a literal 3 1/2 years?  Only if it is in the future.

One more thing we should see about the 1260 days (years):

Revelation 11:3

And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.

(for the full context of the two witnesses, read Rev. 11:3-13)

If these 1260 days were the years 538 to 1798, who were the two witnesses of God?  Recall that according to the WMSCOG there were NO people of God on the earth during that time period.

In summary:
The Catholic Church does NOT fit the prophecy of ruling for 1260 days (years).  The historical record shows no reason to select the years 538 to 1798, and neither does it support the characteristics of the rule of the beast, considering WMSCOG doctrine.

Click here to go on to Part 7.

Is 666 the Pope? - Part 5 - The 1260 Days

So far in this series, we've seen in Part 3 that the prophecy of the 10 kingdoms does not match with the historical record of the fall of Rome and the rise of the Papacy, like the World Mission Society Church of God claims.  And in Part 4 we saw that the Papacy was not a good fit for the prophecy of the fatal wound.

The results of my investigation are showing that the Pope is NOT the Antichrist according to these prophecies.  But I want to be thorough, so I won't quit yet.  For your reference, here again is where you can find the "Pope-is-Antichrist" teaching.

Continuing to examine the beast of the sea in Revelation 13...
Today, the 1260 days:

Rev. 13:5-7

And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them...

This is similar to Daniel's prophecy:
Dan. 7:25
He shall speak pompous words against the Most High,
      Shall persecute the saints of the Most High,
      And shall intend to change times and law.
      Then the saints shall be given into his hand
      For a time and times and half a time.

A time (1 year) and times (2 years) and half a time (half a year) equals 3 1/2 years, which equals 42 months, which equals 1260 days (figuring with the Hebrew calendar of 30 days per month).  This length of time is mentioned 8 times in the Bible regarding the end days (Daniel 7:25, 9:27, and 12:7; Revelation 11:2-3, 13:5, and 12:6,14), which might cause you to wonder if all 8 verses are referring to the same era.   Right now, we'll focus on Rev. 13:5 which tells us the beast was given authority to rule for 1260 days.

In prophecy, a day could refer to a year (Eze. 4:6; Num. 14:34), but it doesn't have to.  In Daniel 4:16, the seven prophetic years were seven actual years, not 2520 years (7x12x30=2520).  Therefore, the 1260 days (3 1/2 years) could prophesy 1260 days or 1260 years.

Remember in Part 4 we saw the many different years that could have been considered fatal wounds to the Papacy?  The question was, why choose the one in 1798?  The answer lies in this prophecy of the 1260 days.

Backing up 1260 years from 1798 gives us the year 538.  This is the year the WMSCOG claims the last of the 3 opposing kingdoms was destroyed by the Papacy (See Part 1), which cemented the Pope's rule.  Therefore, they say, the Pope had a rule of 1260 years, fulfilling this prophecy.

Now the question is, did the Pope's rule begin in 538 with the destruction of the Ostrogoths (as the WMSCOG claims)?

To find the answer, I've been researching the history of the Church and the history of the Gothic War of 535-554.  These are years that could be considered as the mark of the beginning of the reign of the Catholic Church (not counting Matt. 16:18 or Acts 2):

313--Edict of Milan, issued by Constantine, ending the persecution of Christians
325--Council of Nicaea, which the WMSCOG says ended the Passover for the world
551--The Gothic War, Rome finally liberated from the Ostrogoths and placed under Byzantine control
553--Last remnants of the Gothic army defeated
800--Charlemagne, the first emperor crowned by a Pope

Where is the year 538, which the Pope-is-Antichrist teaching clings to?  Maybe we'll find it if we look closer at the Gothic War?  Here's a summary of the war as it relates to Rome...

536--Byzantine (Roman) army enters Rome
537 to 538--First siege of Rome, ends with the Romans maintaining control
546--Second siege of Rome, ends with the Goths in control of Rome
547--Romans regain control of Rome
549--Third siege of Rome, Rome regained by the Goths
551--Goths lose Rome, and the Romans (Byzantines) are able to maintain control until 751

Reading about the Gothic War tells us that the Ostrogoths were definitely NOT destroyed in 538.  In fact, looking at these dates, there is no good reason to choose the year 538!

Why choose the year 538 from this list, and choose the year 1798 from the list of potential fatal wounds?  So that you can force the Catholic Church to fit into the prophecy of 1260 years.

Do you remember when I checked out the WMSCOG's sources in Part 1 and saw that they were fairly close in their dates of the destruction of three kingdoms?  This is the date that was not quite accurate, and now we see the implications of it.

What kind of church plays with dates like this simply to make a prophecy seem to come to fulfillment?  There are two reasons I can think of: ignorance or malicious intent.  Is this what you'd expect from a church supposedly founded by "Father God" and currently run by "Mother God" in the flesh?

There's more to say about the 1260 days next time.

Click here to go on to Part 6.

Is 666 the Pope? - Part 4 - The Deadly Wound

Just as a reminder, we are looking at the first beast in Revelation 13 to see if it matches the Pope (Papacy), and we are examining the claims of the argument about the Pope to see if they are accurate.

Here is the resource, again, where the "Pope-is-Antichrist" teaching has been clearly stated.  Please remember that the WMSCOG is not the only (or the first) group to hold to this teaching.  So even when I write, "the WMSCOG says...," the other Pope-is-Antichrist groups also say something similar (and vice versa).

In Part 3, we saw how the Pope-is-Antichrist teaching of the 10 kingdoms arising out of the fall of Rome is not accurate with the historical record.  Since the Papacy has failed to match up with this prophecy, we already know that the Pope is NOT the Antichrist, as the WMSCOG teaching claims.  But for the sake of completeness (and just in case you are still not convinced), I'll continue with this study.

Continuing in Revelation 13...
Today, the "deadly wound":

Rev. 13:3-4

And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast. So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?”

The WMSCOG says that this "deadly wound" happened in 1798 when Pope Pius VI was taken captive by one of Napoleon's generals.  He died in 1799 while still being held by French troops.  It took almost 7 months for the next Pope (Pius VII) to be elected.  The church recovered, and the office of Pope is still occupied today.  Is this the "deadly wound" to the Papacy that was healed?

Read the verses carefully and see that this deadly-but-healed wound was such that "all the world marveled and followed the beast."  It's the kind of thing that would be all over the news and everyone would be talking about the miraculous recovery.  Does "all the world" stand in awe of the Papacy surviving this incident?  Are they amazed at the miraculous recovery and exclaim, "Who is like the Papacy [the beast]?"

What about these other "wounds" to the Papacy?...

Pope St. Hyginus--traditionally thought martyred about AD 140.
Pope St. Pius I--martyred by sword in 155.
Pope St. Anicetus--traditionally thought martyred in 166.
Pope St. Soter--traditionally thought martyred about 174.
Pope St. Eleuterus--traditionally thought martyred in 189.
Pope St. Callixtus--martyred about 223.
Pope St. Cornelius--"died a martyr, through extreme hardship" in 253.
Pope St. Stephen I--martyred by beheading in 257.
Pope St. Sixtus II--martyred by beheading in 258.
Pope St. Caius--legend says was martyred in 296.
(Wikipedia List of Popes)

Do you think those are too early in history to count?  Maybe they were early enough to be uncorrupted Popes (as the WMSCOG might define "corrupt")?

Think of this... the WMSCOG says the church was already becoming corrupted, even that early.  After all, Anicetus (who is on the list) was the Pope the WMSCOG accuses of taking the "lead in abolishing the Passover" in 155--a statement that is incorrect.  (See Part 1)

How about these later "wounds"?...

Pope Benedict VI--seized by Roman nobles, imprisoned and strangled in 974.
The East-West Schism--the division of the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church in 1054.
[no Pope for 2 years]--A deadlock in voting resulted in no Pope in office from April 1292 to July 1294.
[no Pope for 2 years, again]--Another deadlock in voting resulting in no Pope in office from April 1314 to August 1316.
[no Pope, yet again for 2 years]--No Pope elected from July 1415 to November 1417.
The Protestant Reformation--the "revolt" in which Protestants broke away from the Roman Catholic Church beginning in 1517.
Pope Pius VI--taken prisoner by Napoleon's general in 1798, and died while still expelled from the Papal States in 1799.  (This is the incident used by the WMSCOG.)
Pope Pius VII--expelled from the Papal States by France from 1809-1814.
Pope Pius IX--During his time as Pope, the Papal States were lost to the Kingdom of Italy (1870).

Consider the list.  Any of these instances could easily be viewed as a deadly wound that healed.  Rev. 13:3-4 indicates only one deadly wound--the word for "wound" is singular, and here we have so many to choose from.  Why choose the one in 1798?  I'll examine that next time with Revelation 13:5-7.

In summary:
Yes, the Papacy (Catholic Church) has many "wounds" that could have caused its collapse, and it has survived.  But the prophecy only refers to one, and it is the kind of deadly wound which causes the world to "wonder, marvel, and be amazed" with its healing.  It's not describing a series of difficult struggles.  The Papacy doesn't work well with this prophecy.

Click here to go on to Part 5.

Is 666 the Pope? - Part 3 - The 10 Kingdoms

We established in Part 2 that we are looking at the first beast in Revelation chapter 13 to see if it matches the Pope (Papacy).  We are also examining the claims of the argument about the Pope to see if they are accurate.

Since I haven't yet found the World Mission Society Church of God's full and complete teaching about the Anrichrist online (please send me a link of you know of one), I'm going to refer you to another page (one of many) where the "Pope-is-Antichrist" teaching (as I'll call it) has been clearly stated.  This can be a resource to you as we consider the claims.

Please remember that the WMSCOG is not the only (or the first) group to hold to this teaching.  So even when I write, "the WMSCOG says...," the other Pope-is-Antichrist groups also say something similar (and vice versa).

Let's start at the beginning of Revelation 13 and take it one part at a time.
Today, the "10 Kingdoms":

Rev. 13:1-2
Then I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name....

This is similar to Daniel's prophecy:
Dan. 7:24

The ten horns are ten kings
      Who shall arise from this kingdom.
      And another shall rise after them;
      He shall be different from the first ones,
      And shall subdue three kings. 

"This kingdom" is the Roman Empire, which is well agreed upon by Bible scholars.
The WMSCOG says that when the Roman Empire finally fell, it was divided into ten kingdoms, three of which were put down by the Papacy, leaving seven.  Also, those three were "uprooted" because they did not agree with the doctrine of the Catholic Church.

The "little horn" of Daniel 7:8 is the Antichrist (the beast) that comes up in the midst of these 10 kingdoms.  The WMSCOG says that since the Pope (Roman Catholic Church) rose to power out of the fall of the Roman Empire, he fits this prophecy.

This "fact" of the 10 kingdoms is well-circulated by the Pope-is-Antichrist groups, but is it historically true?
In other words, can we find the same fact in academic sources, or has it been contrived to fit the argument (which would make it not a fact at all)?

Here's their list of the 10 kingdoms, the last 3 (in green) being the ones who were "subdued":
Visigoths
Anglo-Saxons
Franks
Alemanni
Burgundians
Lombards
Suevi

Heruli

Ostrogoths

Vandals

You might think, "I'm sure they've done their research, so it must be true."  If that's so, then it shouldn't be hard for me to find it too.

I've been looking all over, including reading the source, Ridpath's History of the World, that the WMSCOG trusts enough to quote from in their video (see Part 1).  Why is it so difficult to track down such a statement among legitimate academic sources?  (If you'd like to refer me to one, I'd be happy to hear from you.)

I will show you what I have found...

Here's a map of the Roman Empire at its greatest extent in A.D. 117.  You'll see that it covered a very large territory.  However, the 10 kingdoms named in the Pope-is-Antichrist claim are all in western Europe.  The Roman Empire split in the 3rd century, so we'll just look at the Western Roman Empire.

The Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire lasted until 1453, but the Western Roman Empire fell in 476, when Odoacer and the Heruli conquered Romulus Augustulus, the last Western Roman Emperor.  Here's what was left of the empire then (much smaller!).  Here's a map of Europe circa 476, where I count 8 kingdoms in the right area.

Here's another showing Europe in the time of Odoacer (476-493).  In this map you can see the Kingdom of Syagrius, which was the "last Roman foothold in the west" and was conquered by the Franks in 486.  Since it would technically be considered Roman, it shouldn't be counted.  That leaves 9 kingdoms, since the Lombards were not in the correct territory yet.

Perhaps the best map to use is this one of the Germanic kingdoms in 486.  It's before the first of the three kingdoms was subdued, according to the claim (the Heruli in 493).  It's still not quite a match.  It shows the Anglo-Saxons and the Britons as two separate kingdoms, and the Lombards are again not in the right territory.

Maybe we need to read the history books to see what's happening behind the maps.  Since the WMSCOG trusts Ridpath's History of the World enough to use it as a source, I'll use that as well as the internet.  Remember, I want to know that the Roman Empire was divided exactly into the 10 kingdoms listed above, and that only the 3 were subdued.  I also want to know whether or not the kingdoms disagreed with the Catholic Church.  Keeping the same order as the list above...

The Visigoths maintained their kingdom until 711, when they were conquered and confined to just Castile, which they sustained until the Middle Ages.  Their transition from Arianism to Catholicism happened between 577 and 584.  (Ridpath, pages 426-427)

The Anglo-Saxons maintained their hold in England until 1066.  Paganism was replaced by Christianity there in the 7th century.  (Wikipedia Anglo-Saxons)

The Franks held their kingdom for centuries, with the western part of the kingdom eventually becoming France.  Clovis I, the king of the Franks, converted to Catholicism in 496.  (Wikipedia Franks)

The Alemanni were conquered by the Franks in 496.  Then they were subject to the Ostrogoths, and then again under the control of the Franks in 539, where they were a "nominal dukedom."   Alemannia became Christian in the 7th century.  (Wikipedia Alamannia)

The Burgundian kingdom was conquered by the Franks in 534, becoming part of the Frankish Empire.  Burgundy was an Arian kingdom, but by the time they were conquered, many had converted to Catholicism, including the last king.  (Wikipedia Burgundians) 

The Lombards did not cross the Danube into the territory of the Roman Empire until the 540s, invaded Italy in 568 and finally established their kingdom in there in 572.  (Remember that the Western Roman Empire ended in 476, so that's nearly a century later.)  As for religion, the Lombards were mixed--pagan, Arian, and Catholic.  It wasn't until late in the 7th century that most of them were Catholic.  (Wikipedia Lombards)

The kingdom of the Suevi was incorporated into the kingdom of the Visigoths in 585.  The Suevi were mostly Arian until converting to Catholicism in the 560s.  (Wikipedia Suebi)

The Heruli, led by Odoacer, were the ones who brought an end to the Western Roman Empire in 476, and they are shown on the maps as the Kingdom of Odoacer.  They were conquered by the Ostrogoths in 493.  (Ridpath page 408)  Odoacer was an Arian Christian, but had good relations with the Catholic Church.  (Wikipedia Odoacer)

The Vandals were conquered in 534 by Belisarius, a general of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire.  The reasoning for their attacking the Vandals was "partly with a view to exterminate the Arian heresy, and partly for the purpose of restoring the supremacy of the Empire throughout the West."  (Ridpath, page 430)

The Ostrogoths were already within the territory of the Roman Empire when their king, Theodoric (who was an Arian Christian), conquered Odoacer in 493 and replaced the Heruli in Italy, thus expanding the Ostrogothic Kingdom.  The Eastern Roman Emperor Justinian sent Belisarius to attack the Ostrogoths resulting in the Gothic War from 535 to 554, but their kingdom did not fall easily.  Belisarius captured Rome in 536 and Ravenna (the Ostrogoth capital) in 540.  Control of Rome went back and forth several times. (Wikipedia Ostrogoths and Gothic War)  Finally, the last of the Ostrogothic kings was defeated in 553.  (Ridpath page 354)  It's worth noting that the WMSCOG claims the Ostrogoths were destroyed in 538. (Part 1)

Those are the supposed 10 kingdoms.  BUT one of them, the Kingdom of the Lombards, did not establish their kingdom in the territory of the Western Roman Empire until nearly a century after the end of the Empire, and about 35 years after the last supposed uprooting of the 3 kingdoms.

Then there are these kingdoms in the territory of the Western Roman Empire which aren't even on the list of the 10:
The Britons were distinct from the Anglo-Saxons.  You can see it on this map. (Wikipedia Britons historical)
The Bavarians "were governed by their own kings both before and after the downfall of the West." (Ridpath page 396)

Also, five of the kingdoms were conquered, not three, when the Ostrogoths were finally defeated (Alemanni, Burgundians, Heruli, Vandals, and Ostrogoths--six if you also count the Suevi which met its end later in 585).

Plus the Pope-is-Antichrist teaching says the 3 kingdoms were subdued because of their conflict with Catholic doctrine, and the Ostrogothic kingdom was the last of those 3.  However...
Only one of the kingdoms at that time was Catholic (the Franks).
Two of the kingdoms were conquered even though they were Catholic (the Burgundians and the Suevi).

In summary...

The fall of the Western Roman Empire does NOT fit this prophecy of the 10 kingdoms arising with 3 being uprooted to leave 7 kingdoms.  Therefore, the Papacy (or Roman Catholic Church) does NOT fit this prophecy either.

Next time I'll examine Revelation 13:3-4...

Click here to go on to Part 4.

P.S.--Here's a chart to help you organize all this information...

Kingdom	Conquered	Catholic?	Notes
Visigoths	711	Converted about 580	Arian, yet not "destroyed by the Papacy"
Anglo-Saxons	1066	Converted in 600s	Pagan, yet not "destroyed by the Papacy"
Franks	became France	King converted in 496
Alemanni	496	Converted in 600s	Controlled by the Franks, Ostrogoths, and then Franks again, should be counted with the other conquered kingdoms
Burgundians	534	Converted prior to 534	Conquered even though they were Catholic, should be counted with the other conquered kingdoms
Lombards	Kingdom not established until 572	Converted in 600s	Too late to be considered one of the 10, not even in Roman territory when Ostrogoths were supposedly conquered
Suevi	585	Converted in 560s	Not "destroyed by the Papacy" when they were Arian, yet conquered when they were Catholic
Heruli	493	Arian king	Conquered by the Ostrogoths
Vandals	534	Arian
Ostrogoths	553	Arian king	Not destroyed in 538 as claimed
Britons			Not mentioned in the Pope-is-Antichrist claim
Bavarians			Not mentioned in the Pope-is-Antichrist claim

Is 666 the Pope? - Part 2 - Which Antichrist

My quest with this series is to investigate the World Mission Society Church of God claim that the Pope is the Antichrist whose number is 666, referred to in Revelation 13:18.  In Part 1 we saw that the WMSCOG still has a problem with their information sources, like they had in trying to prove the cross is an idol.  But let's try to move beyond that and see what the Bible has to say about this claim.

To start with, we should know that this idea of the Pope's being the Antichrist is not new, and it did not originate with the WMSCOG.  It was a view held by major Protestant reformers, and the idea actually dates back several centuries before the Reformation, though the reasoning for it seems to have grown over time.  There are many websites discussing reasons why the Pope (or Papacy) might satisfy the Biblical descriptions of the Antichrist, so I don't plan on going into detail here.  Wikipedia has a good summary you can read.

We also should know that the Pope is not the only candidate in the running as the identity of the one whose number is 666.  You can read about a few others here, like Nero and Muhammad.  Here is an even longer list of possible Antichrists, and even Prince Charles is a possibility.  The European Union is a popular candidate.  But a search on the Internet shows that the Pope (or Papacy) is one of the lead choices among those who think they can identify the Antichrist.  Since that's also the WMSCOG's choice, I'm only going to focus on the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church.

There's one more thing we need to do in preparing to study this, and that's define some vocabulary.  The word "antichrist" only appears in a few verses, all of them in 1 John and 2 John.  This is the complete list:

1 John 2:18

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.

1 John 2:22

Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son.

1 John 4:3

and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.

2 John 1:7

For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

The term "antichrist" is very broad.  It can refer to anyone "who denies the Father and the Son."  What we're wanting to talk about and study is something more specific--THE Antichrist, the major one of the end times, written about in Revelation

Notice the word "antichrist" doesn't appear in Revelation.  Instead, we have the word "beast."

Rev. 13:1

Then I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name.

But there is also a second beast.

Rev. 13:11-12

Then I saw another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two horns like a lamb and spoke like a dragon.  And he exercises all the authority of the first beast in his presence, and causes the earth and those who dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.

Revelation distinguishes the second beast from the first by calling the second beast the "false prophet."

Rev. 16:13

And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs coming out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.

Let's read a little more about the false prophet (the second beast).  You can see the first beast is just called the "beast"...

Rev. 13:13-18

13 He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. 14 And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived. 15 He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed. 16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666.

In Rev. 16:13 (above) there are three key players in the end time, what you might call an "unholy trinity."  They are the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet.  The beast is the one whose number is 666, the false prophet works on the beast's behalf, but who is the dragon?  The dragon is Satan.

Rev. 12:9

So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Though the dragon and the beast may have some similarities in description, they are not one and the same.  The dragon gives authority and power to the beast.

Rev. 13:2-3

Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion. The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority.

We might call all three of these "Antichrists" (1 John 2:22), but that would get confusing.  They are three distinct persons.  For the sake of clarity, in my studies here I'm going to make the distinction of calling them by their Revelation titles: the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet.

The WMSCOG's position is that the Pope is the one whose number is 666.  I know that because they say so themselves, in their video at minute 6:00, "So, the identity of 666 is the head of the Roman Catholic Church, the Pope!!!"
666 is the number of the beast.  So to be perfectly clear, the WMSCOG claims the Pope (Papacy) is the beast.

Therefore my investigation will be whether or not the Pope matches the description of the beast.  It's important to have a clear focus.
More next time...

Click here to go on to Part 3.

Is 666 the Pope? - Part 1 - WMSCOG's Sources

One of the key teachings of the World Mission Society Church of God is that the Pope is the Antichrist whose number is 666 (Rev. 13:18).  Although I'm not Catholic, I still find this idea worthy of research, and I'd like to know how much merit it has.  Is the WMSCOG right?  Is the Pope the Antichrist?  How can we know?

After seeing the glaring distortions of their sources in their effort to prove the cross an idol, I've become wary of all the WMSCOG's research.  Let's start there and see if the WMSCOG has presented the idea with good scholarship, or if they have misused their resources again.

"The Identity of 666" is an official video of the World Mission Society Church of God which presents their teaching about the Antichrist.  In it they make several statements about the history of the Catholic Church, accompanied by names of their source books.  I remember in my university studies the importance of using sources to document research.  At first view it looks like the WMSCOG has done scholarly work.  Let's check out these sources and see if that is true.  We'll take the statements in order...

[starting at minute 2:48]
In A.D.493, Heruli was destroyed by the Papacy. (Ridpath, "History of the World")
In A.D. 534, Vandals was destroyed by the Papacy. (Ridpath, "History of the World")
In A.D. 538, Ostrogoths was destroyed by the Papacy. (Ridpath, "History of the World")
According to the prophecy, three kingdoms were destroyed by the Papacy. 

Ridpath's History of the World is available to read online. The reference about the end of the Heruli kingdom is on page 408.  The Heruli kingdom was replaced by the Ostrogothic kingdom, see page 352.  Page 394 and page 430 tell us of the end of the Vandals. And page 354 records the end of the Ostrogothic kingdom, except it was in 552-553, not 538.  Whether or not these were the three kingdoms of the prophecy remains to be seen, but the WMSCOG follow their source fairly closely with the dates.  (UPDATE: Though two of these three dates are correct, there are many other history facts misrepresented.  See Part 3, Part 5, and Part 6 for more information, including the problem with the incorrect date.)

[at minute 4:12]
In A.D. 321, the Pope abolished the Sabbath and introduced the Sunday service. (From "The History of Christianity")
Sunday service rests upon the authority of the Catholic Church. (From "The Faith of Millions")

I cannot talk about the first statement because I have found at least 5 different books titled The History of Christianity, and so far in none of them have I found the stated fact.  I'll keep looking (and update this if I find something), but good scholarship would dictate that the reference be more specific.  The WMSCOG should give an author.  I will address the fact itself in a future post about Sunday and the Sabbath, but for now I'm left to wonder if this reference is real or not.

UPDATE: I was recently able to examine the WMSCOG's "Evidence Book," and it shows a picture of a book titled "The History of Christianity (A Lion Handbook)."  Since it was used as a source in the Evidence Book, we can guess that it's the same book used as a source here.  The book is out of print, but I was able to borrow it from my local public library.  This book does NOT tell us that "the Pope abolished the Sabbath and introduced the Sunday service."  What is does say on page 29 is, "Sunday, the Christian day of worship, was observed from the very beginning of the Christian church," and on page 140, "When in 321 Constantine made the first day of the week a holiday, he called it 'the venerable day of the Sun' (Sunday)."  Constantine was the Emperor, not the Pope, and the book says nothing about the Sabbath being "abolished," only that Constantine made Sunday an officially sanctioned holiday.  So then, this would be another misrepresented source.

As for the second statement, The Faith of Millions is available online, and I've found the reference on page 401.  It says, "They [Protestant churches] have continued the custom [of Sunday service], even though it rests upon the authority of the Catholic Church and not upon an explicit text in the Bible."  Now back up to the bottom of page 399 and read through to 401 for the context.  Notice on page 400, "The Church received the authority to make such a change from her Founder, Jesus Christ."  The book explains the reasons for the change, and whether or not they are valid will be explored in a future post.  In the meantime, does The Faith of Millions say Sunday service came purely by the authority of the Catholic Church, or by the authority of Jesus through the Church?  I'll let you decide that one.

[at minute 4:17]
In A.D. 155, the Pope took the lead in abolishing the Passover. (From "A History of the Early Church to A.D. 500")
In A.D. 325, the Pope abolished the Passover. (From "The Faith of Our Fathers")

We can look inside A History of the Early Church to AD 500 at Amazon.com.  The information about the year 155 was taken from page 83.  The WMSCOG did not put the statement in quotes, so we're not looking for an exact sentence, but let's see what this book says about the Pope in the year 155.  It says, "In 155 Polycarp argued the question with the Pope Anicetus, but as neither could persuade the other they agreed to differ."  It does not say that "the Pope took the lead," but that he agreed to let the difference in dates continue.  Again we have another misleading statement.

The Faith of Our Fathers is another book available to read online.  Yet, I cannot find in it the fact that "in A.D. 325, the Pope abolished the Passover."  There is brief mention of the Council of Nicaea in 325, but no connection between that year and the Passover.  Page 134 records that there was a "question regarding the proper day for celebrating Easter" which was decided by Pope St. Victor I, but that was about the year 190.  Unless someone can direct us to the correct page in this reference, there is nothing apparent to connect the claimed fact with the given source.

[at minute 4:30]
In A.D. 431, the Roman Catholic Church introduced the cross and the statue of the Virgin Mary. (From "Harpers' Book of Facts")

Harper's Book of Facts is also available to read online.  I've already addressed the WMSCOG's misuse of this source for the cross, but how about the statue of the Virgin Mary?  Harper's Book of Facts tells us that 431 was the first record of Mary being called the mother of God (page 688), but I cannot find a reference to statues of Mary anywhere in this book.  I've tried the search feature and looking up every article that might be related, and still nothing about statues of Mary.  If anyone finds it, please let me know, but as it stands, the WMSCOG's statement is yet another misrepresentation.

[at minute 5:04]
It is because the Roman Catholic Church killed more than 50 million people through the Inquisition and witch-hunts. ("Bible Handbook")

Here is another source without an author specified.  I have not yet found the correct Bible Handbook out of many different books with that title.  Again I must wonder if this reference is real.

[minute 5:35 shows a picture of "Our Sunday Visitor" Apr. 18, 1915]
The letters inscribed in the Pope's mitre are these Vicarius Filii Dei, which is the Latin for the Vicar the son of God.

I have not found a copy of this Our Sunday Visitor, but I have seen it referenced by others, and the WMSCOG has a photocopy of it.  I'll count this a successful source.

So let's tally the score and see how the WMSCOG did with their sources this time....
Good=2      Bad=5      Maybe=1
That's not a very good score, is it?  It reminds me of the "Information Control" aspect of a cult--holding back and distorting information to suit their purposes.

Sorry for such a long post today, but it's good to figure out where we're starting from.
Next time I'll start examining the claims made by the WMSCOG, and we'll see what the Bible has to say about the Antichrist.

Click here to go on to Part 2.