vicarivs filii dei

If you only knew how many times this has been disproved. Do a Google search. I'm not wasting my time.

God bless,

Grant

P.S. I thought Christians denounced numerology?

 

UH, OH another boo boo!

 

Your all wet. It's al gore. That's why I didn't vote for him.

Here is his name in the ASCII code:
al gore = 97 + 108 + 32 + 103 + 111 + 114 + 101 = 666



As Grant says, this has been handled many times over. I used to have some numberology that "showed" that Jesus himself was the antichrist.

 

Do you notice how many of these forgeries and defamations are directed today by non-Catholics at Catholicism? Compare that to the number of forgeries and defamations directed today by Catholics at non-Catholic Christians. Hint: big number, small number! (I don't know of a single one of the latter)

Now, tell me again who is the prince of lies, and what church is he attacking?

 

It's OK if you're attacking Catholicism. Many things are OK if you're attacking Catholicism.

 

Rakka,

Do you believe that numerology is a Christian practice?

God bless,

Grant

 

Here's a little site about numerology. Has "Christian" written all over it, right? Right?

http://www.astrology-numerology.com/numerology.html

Grant

 

Since ignorance seems to be running rampant on this thread - perhaps "a bit of historic light".

#1. The Pope IS TITLED the "Vicar of Christ".

#2. The Vicarius Filii Dei - is literally "Vicar of the Son of God". The RCC tries to make a "big point" that the Pope IS the Vicar of Christ and NOT the Vicar of the Son of God - to avoid this pitfall. (AS if there is a real difference).

#3. The Ballyhooing going on here as if to deny that the Pope is called the "Vicar of Christ" is less than complimentary of the RC understanding of their own titles.

#4. The Historic Title "Vicar of the Son of God" -- "Vicarius Filii Dei" was so well accepted that when the Catholic church chose to forge a document that would justify its desire to hold both civil and religious power - IT tossed in that title "Vicarius Filii Dei".

#5. Rev 13 (that everyone is so happy to slam on behalf of the RCC on this thread) - Says

Rev 13:
16 And he causes all, the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hand or on their forehead,
17 and he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, either 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 the number is that of a man; and his number is six hundred and sixty-six.


#6. The last "attribute" given in Rev 13 is merely one of several "indicators" that are combined to point to the identity of the beast power that starts out Rev 13.

The "Calculation" that is being done on this thread - using the same lettering and numbering system known to John at the time of the writing of the book of Revelation - has more "exegetically sound" application.


---------------

Regarding point #4 above -

The document was forged to make it "appear" that Emperor Constantine wrote it and gave legal precident for giving the RCC both lands and political power.

The Donation of Constantine

is the most famous forgery in European history. Originally discovered in the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals in the 9th century (c. 847-853), which are now also recognized to be forgeries, parts of the Donation of Constantine were later incorporated into most of the medieval collections of Catholic canon law (Anselm's, Cardinal Deusdedit's (c. 1087), and Gratian's Decretum (c. 1148) also known as Concordia Discordantium Canonum). So the Donation of Constantine was held to be genuine for centuries.
The Donation of Constantine is cited in writing by no less than 10 Popes as proof of their civil authority and sovereignty over Rome, and what came to be known as the Papal States, which included a large portion of Italy. It was eventually exposed as a pious fraud in 1440 by ~Laurentius Valla who proved it had to have been written several centuries after the death of Constantine (337 A.D.)

So "WHO" was affirming contents of this document (including the Title it admits that the Pope is well known for having) for all those centuries - "No Less than TEN Popes".

Notice that in their forgery - when it comes to this title for the Pope - the RCC did not make it appear that Constantine GAVE the Pope that title - they make it appear that Constantine was merely recognizing that everyone ALREADY acknowledge that title as a title for the Pope.

So was it really the case of those "naughty Protesting Catholics slandering the pure and holy name of the papacy and coming up with this title?" (as many on this thread have pretended).

Let the records show - that the RCC authored the document - not Chick Publications.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob,

Irregardless of the sins of past popes, you affirmed yourself that the existence of the title "Vicar of the Son of God" appears as an official title only in an unofficial document.

It holds no weight. It has never held any weight. It is an embarassment to sound theology. And Ellen G. White's name also comes out to 666 using the same method. So unless she is the/a antiChrist, you're self-condemning your own denomination.

But, you guys go ahead and have fun. I'm done with this thread too, because hateful name-calling based on unChristian numerology practices really don't interest me all that much. It only shows me the depths to which the wrong will try to show themselves right.

God bless,

Grant

 

Hey, adding up the numbers I get:

112-53-501

How does 500 + 1 = 6?

Never heard of that before. Must be some superstitious person trying to come up with ways to slam the Catholic Church to make himself feel better.

Neal

 

"The RCC tries to make a "big point" that the Pope IS the Vicar of Christ and NOT the Vicar of the Son of God - to avoid this pitfall. (AS if there is a real difference)."

The difference is the numbers don't add up to 666 Bob, therefore Raaka's Biblical Math is bad and therefore it is a lie even if by chance the Pope is the antichrist (which he is not). A lie is a lie even if it were hurled at the truth is my point. Which of course it is. Just not the truth you and Raaka want.

Tell me Bob, is it okay to lie about your enimies. Is lying only a sin when it is against someone you like or don't know? "well it doesn't matter if he didn't kill him, he's a jerk and should be in jail anyway.".

Grant is right. This thread is dead. See ya.

 

Unfortunately it is the AFFIRMATION of the Pope that "MAKES it official" there is no HIGHER source in the RCC.

The affirmation of "no less than TEN Popes" establishes "The USE" without contradiction.

The only point was "IT was USED" by the RCC.

IN this case not only was it "used" by the RCC - it was "fabricated" by them as Well. They "designed it" from scratch. You can't even argue "Well Constantine just didn't know any better". Constantine ISN't the author! And 10 Popes DID know what was in the document and DID affirm that the contents were valid statements about the church. The fact that they ALSO Forged it ONLY INCREASES its use as a reflector of their OWN views.

To turn around and say "Protestant invented that about the RCC" is silly.

In Christ,

Bob

 

501
112
53
====
666?

Are we talking about the same thing?

IN Christ,

Bob

 

No less than Ten Popes affirm THE CONTENTS of the document - Contents which the RCC itself authored -

Notice "the Contents" --


The document reads in part as follows in Latin: (caps added for emphasis) -
Sicut B. Petrus in terris VICARIUS FILII DEI esse videtur constitutus, ita et Pontifices, qui ipsius principis apostolorum gerunt vices, principatus potestatem amplius quam terrena imperialis nostrae serenitatis mansuetudo habere videtur, conscessam a nobis nostroque imperio obtineant...


In English that is-
As the Blessed Peter is seen to have been constituted vicar of the Son of God on the earth, so the Pontiffs who are the representatives of that same chief of the apostles, should obtain from us and our empire the power of a supremacy greater than the clemency of our earthly imperial serenity is seen to have conceded to it,
(continuing beyond the latin above) choosing that same chief of the apostles and his vicars to be our constant intercessors with God. And to the extent of our earthly Imperial power, we have decreed that his holy Roman Church shall be honored with veneration, and that more than our empire and earthly throne the most sacred seat of the Blessed Peter shall be gloriously exalted, we giving to it power, and dignity of glory, and vigor, and honor imperial. And we ordain and decree that he shall have the supremecy as well over the four principal seats, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Constantinople, as also over all the churches of God in the whole earth. And the Pontiff, who at the time shall be at the head of the holy Roman church itself, shall be more exalted than, and chief over, all the priests of the whole world, and according to his judgment everything which is provided for the
service of God and for the stability of the faith of Christians is to be administered.
Source: Donation of Constantine, quoted in Christopher B. Coleman's The Treatise of Lorenzo Valla on the Donation of Constantine, pp. 12,13 Copyright 1922 by Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn.


In Christ,

Bob

 

Does anyone know how Vicarius Christi translates into Greek?

~Lorelei

 

No, Bob, the record does not show that "the RCC" (meaning a pope or official council) authored the document.

A forged document. An invalid papal title in a forged document. See how anxiously some grasp at any chance to damage the Church. Who inspires such hatred? Does anyone dare say it is God?

 

Bob,

Did you notice that although the forged document does refer to Peter as the "VICARIUS FILII DEI." when you read further,

it says that the rest of the Popes are the vicars of Peter (VICARIUS PETRI).

So it really, in this case, doesn't matter if 10 Popes used the document to show their "right" to the whole Magilla because the document calls them vicars of Peter, not vicars of the son of God.

 

If I'm the vicar of Joe and Joe is the vicar of George, then I am the vicar of George. That's like a mathmatical property of some sort.

It's kinda like x=y=5; it means both x and y = 5, that is y=5 and x=5.