Session 10 - The Mark of the Beast Part 2

Steps to Life

Prophecy Seminar

Session 10: The Mark of the Beast Part 2

Let us review some of the points from our last lesson:

1. The seventh day, Saturday, is the day the Bible calls the "Sabbath." In the Ten Commandments God commands us to "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" (Exodus 20:8).

2. Jesus and the apostles kept the seventh–day Sabbath holy, and there is no record of its change, either before or after Jesus’ death.

3. There are only nine texts in the Bible that mention the first day of the week. None of them even gives a hint of Sunday being considered a day of worship, a holy day, or a Christian Sabbath.

4. Besides the weekly Sabbath, there were also yearly sabbaths such as the Passover sabbath (Leviticus 23). These were ceremonial sabbaths which God established at Sinai to point forward to Jesus’ coming ministry and death. Thus they were called "a shadow of things to come" (Colossians 2:17). The Passover sabbath came on the fourteenth day of the Jewish month, Nisan, the very day Jesus was crucified. The Bible says that "Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us" (1 Corinthians 5:7). Thus, when Jesus died, these ceremonial sabbaths had no more significance, for they had been fulfilled.

5. The seventh–day Sabbath has nothing to do with "Jewish" ceremonies. It was established long before there were any Jews or Jewish ceremonies. The Bible never calls it the "Jewish Sabbath," but rather the "Lord’s Day." Jesus said that it was His day, and that He made it for mankind, not just for the Jews (Matthew 12:8; Mark 2:27, 28; Exodus 20:10). The Jews kept the Sabbath simply because they were God’s people, and as God’s people they worshipped on God’s day.

6. The Sabbath can be kept legalistically, as the Pharisees did in Jesus’ day, but if it is kept the way Jesus kept it, it is a great blessing. The Sabbath was not given for the purpose of "earning salvation" or "works," for it was established in Eden before there was any sin or a need of salvation.

7. Calling Sunday the Lord’s Day can never make it so, anymore than calling a cut piece of glass a diamond makes it a diamond. Calling it such may confuse people, but it will never change the truth. Hitler said that if people are repeatedly told a lie (especially by authoritative sources), they will eventually believe it. In this case, he was right.

8. The Sabbath was kept in Eden by God and man (Genesis 2:2; Mark 2:27). It was kept by Abraham, for God said that he "kept My charge, My commandments, . . . and My Laws" (Genesis 26:5). It was kept by Israel before Sinai (Exodus 16:22-30). It was kept by Christ (Luke 4:16). It was kept by all the apostles. There is not one instance recorded of an apostle keeping Sunday or not keeping the Sabbath. The Bible records eighty–four Sabbaths that Paul kept, and not a single Sunday. The Sabbath will be kept by God’s people in the last days (Revelation 14:5, 6; Isaiah 58:12, 13; Revelation 12:17; 22:14). It is the distinguishing mark of those who do not receive the mark of the Beast (compare Revelation 14:1 with Hebrews 8:10 and Revelation 14:12, see also Ezekiel 20:20). And finally, it will be kept by the redeemed after Jesus establishes His new kingdom.

Isaiah 66:22 " ‘For as the new heavens and the new earth which I will make shall remain before Me,’ says the Lord, ‘So shall your descendants and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass that from one New Moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, all flesh shall come to worship before Me,’ says the Lord."

9. From Genesis to Revelation, the Sabbath is a special sign between God and His people.

Ezekiel 20:12 "Moreover I also gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between them and Me, that they might know that I am the Lord who sanctifies them."

Ezekiel 20:20 "Hallow My Sabbaths, and they will be a sign between Me and you, that you may know that I am the Lord your God."

10. The Sabbath is the only commandment that starts out with the word "Remember"—don’t forget. It is the special commandment that God says shows our true allegiance to Him (Ezekiel 20:20), yet man says it is unimportant.

Somebody Has Been Tampering With God’s Law

Surely, somebody has been tampering with God’s law and God’s authority. We find that power prophesied in Daniel.

Daniel 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."

Here is a power that says it would intend to change times and law. The only law of God that deals with time is the Sabbath commandment; and sure enough, we see that it is the commandment that someone has tried to change. Someone has tampered with God’s law! Who is he?

In our lesson on the Antichrist, we began to identify this power. If you do not remember that lesson, you will want to review it. There we learned that this power is described as a little horn that comes out of the fourth beast, which represented the pagan Roman power. Let us briefly review the first part of Daniel 7 again.

Daniel 7:2 "Daniel spoke, saying, ‘I saw in my vision by night, and behold, the four winds of heaven were stirring up the Great Sea. 3 And four great beasts came up from the sea, each different from the other. 4 The first was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings. I watched till its wings were plucked off; and it was lifted up from the earth and made to stand on two feet like a man, and a man’s heart was given to it. 5 And suddenly another beast, a second, like a bear. It was raised up on one side, and had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. And they said thus to it: ‘Arise, devour much flesh!’ 6 After this I looked, and there was another, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird. The beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it. 7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, exceedingly strong. It had huge iron teeth; it was devouring, breaking in pieces, and trampling the residue with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns. 8 I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots. And there, in this horn, were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous words."

Here we have pictured the same four world powers as were depicted in Daniel 2 with the image that had four different kinds of metals. In Daniel 2 the four metals depicted the four world powers, starting with Babylon (Daniel 2:37, 38). Here God uses four beasts to depict the same world powers (Daniel 7:17, 23), but adding more details. Thus the lion represents Babylon. The bear represents the kingdom that overthrew Babylon, which the Bible, as well as history, says was Medo–Persia (Daniel 5:28-31). The leopard kingdom was the kingdom of Greece, again predicted by the Bible and verified by history (Daniel 8:20, 21). The beast kingdom that replaced Greece was that monster of vice, the pagan Roman empire.

Rome was a blood–thirsty nation that enjoyed killing for the fun of it. When there was not a war, the Romans entertained themselves by watching gladiators kill each other. They hated Christians and threw them to the lions for sport. Nero dipped them in wax, tied them to posts around the walk–way of his garden path, and set them on fire to provide light for his idolatrous parties. They invented such instruments of torture as the cross, the crown of thorns, and whippings. It is estimated that they tortured 500,000 or more Christians to death.

Rome lasted as the dominant power of the earth for over 600 years. The prophecies of both Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 predicted that this fourth power, depicted by the legs of iron and the non–descript beast, would eventually be broken into fragmented parts.

Daniel 2:41 "Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay."

Daniel 2 gave us the first picture of the fragmentation of Rome. All the world powers before Rome were conquered by some other single power—Medo–Persia conquered Babylon; Greece conquered Medo–Persia; Rome conquered Greece; but Rome was fragmented into its European pieces. For centuries after the breakup of Rome, Europe was still called the "Holy Roman Empire." Many monarchs tried to reunite Europe into one cohesive nation again, but the Bible says it never will be united again. The Bible says that Jesus will come in the days of a divided Europe.

Daniel 2:44 "And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever."

Daniel 2 first revealed that the Roman Empire would eventually be divided. Daniel 7 gives us the exact number of entities it would be divided into.

Daniel 7:24 "The ten horns are ten kings (or kingdoms) who shall arise from this kingdom."

It should be noted here that "horns" and "beasts" both depict nations or kingdoms. God uses horns in order to show where a nation came from. In the New Testament, the "little horn" of Daniel 7 is depicted as a beast.

Rome was divided into ten kingdoms just as the prophecy predicted. Between the years of A.D. 351 and A.D. 476, barbarian hordes divided the once–proud Roman government, carving out governments of their own, the Anglo-Saxons who took over England, the Franks (France), Alemanni (Germany), Suevi (Portugal), Visigoths (Spain), Bergundians (Southern France), Lombards (Switzerland), Ostrogoths (in the area of Greece and later Italy), Heruli (Italy), and Vandals (Northern Africa).

As Daniel was watching the predictions of the future played out before him, he saw in succession the symbols for Babylon, Medo–Persia, Greece, Rome, and divided Europe. Then he saw the most startling prediction of all. He saw a little power develop that would become exceedingly strong, who would try to change God’s law. This becomes the main subject of the chapter, the greatest concern of Daniel.

Daniel 7:8 "I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots. And there, in this horn, were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous words."

As Daniel was considering the horns, there came up another horn, a little horn, among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots. This horn had eyes like a man and a mouth speaking great things. Daniel’s attention was immediately arrested. This horn was truly different from all the other horns.

This horn first appeared little to Daniel, but it soon became greater in appearance than any of the other horns.

Daniel 7:20 "And about the ten horns that were on its head, and about the other horn which came up, before which three fell, namely, that horn which had eyes and a mouth which spoke pompous words, whose appearance was greater than his fellows."

In a previous lesson on the Antichrist, we noticed two things about this political power. First of all, this horn came up among the other horns. Daniel was exceedingly interested in this horn, as are we.

Daniel 7:8 "I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them."

Second, we noticed that this horn came up after the other horns.

Daniel 7:24 "The ten horns are ten kings (kingdoms) who shall arise from this kingdom (the Roman Empire). And another shall rise after them."

The ten horns represented the ten kingdoms that Rome was divided into. This division began in A.D. 351 and was complete by A.D. 476. Thus, according to prophecy, this "little–horn" power was to arise in Europe sometime after A.D. 476.

What political power arose in Europe sometime after A.D. 476, became a more dominant power than any of the other European countries, and before whose rise three European countries were destroyed?

We think of Charlemagne—he was a great general. But he was merely a part of the Franks (i.e. France), one of the ten original horns. Moreover, no powers were destroyed before his rise. It could not be he.

So what power could this be? Let us look at a few other identifying characteristics. The verse said that he spoke "pompous words." What kind of pompous words did he speak?

Daniel 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."

These pompous words were spoken against God. Somehow this power would assume prerogatives that belong only to God, so much so that he would even attempt to change God’s times and law. So this is a religious power. This would be a religious power that would also have political powers. Horns represent kings or kingdoms—political powers—but this political power would also, somehow, be a religious power.

Daniel 7:24 "The ten horns are ten kings who shall arise from this kingdom. And another (king or kingdom) shall rise after them; he shall be different from the first ones."

In Revelation, we find this same religious–political power mentioned. It is pictured as a beast rather than a horn. (Remember, both beasts and horns represent nations and political powers, and are used interchangeably. The fourth beast itself, representing pagan Rome, is pictured later in Daniel as a horn.)

Revelation 13:5 "And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty–two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 And 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."

Notice, again, that it would speak great and pompous words against the Most High. There is another characteristic that keeps cropping up, and that is that it would be a persecuting power, and would "make war with the saints." In other words it would persecute people for religious reasons. The persecution is not against criminals, but against holy people (a "saint" is a holy person, that is what the word "saint" means, a holy person is a person who keeps God’s law which is holy—Romans 7:12). Therefore we are looking for a power that would persecute people for keeping God’s law.

Now our curiosity is aroused. What European, religious power arose to a political position sometime after A.D. 476 and persecuted people for religious reasons? What religious power persecuted people whose beliefs were different from its teachings and whose persecution would not be just confined to its own territory, but would be carried out within all these other nations as well? Was there a European religious–political power during the Dark Ages that persecuted, tortured, and killed people; putting them in dungeons, stretching them on the "rack," and burning them at the stake?

Our curiosity is indeed aroused. What power could this be? We still remember many of the great men of history—Charlemagne, Martin Luther, Chaucer, Ignatius Loyola, Pope Gregory VIII, Michelangelo and others—these are household names. And we remember many of the places and events of these centuries—the Reformation, the Inquisition, the popes and prelates, the Spanish Armada, people being burned at the stake for religious convictions, etc., history that is known to all of us. What political–religious power could Daniel be talking about that arose among the countries of Europe after the demise of pagan Rome, and which political–religious power became a dominating, persecuting power that killed people for religious convictions? Certainly, a power like that should be readily recognizable by us. But before trying to identify it, let us look at one other biblical description that Paul gives us about this power.

2 Thessalonians 2:1 "Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, 2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming."

Here, again, we find the same description of this power as found in Daniel 7 and Revelation 13. Notice again that he would oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God and that he would work against the law of God—he is called that "lawless one."

BUT NOTICE: Paul said that this power was already at work, even in his day! "For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work." The roots of this power go clear back to Paul’s day. Satan was diligently at work to establish his own counterfeit system as soon as Christ left. He wanted a system through which he could work to try to change God’s holy law. That Satan should be active in organizing a counterfeit religious system should not be surprising, for Paul says that "Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness" (2 Corinthians 11:14, 15).

However, Paul said that this power could not fully exert itself at that time until another power first be "taken out of the way." "Only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way." That was the power that was then in control (the one who "now" restrains in Paul’s day), which was pagan Rome, under the control of the Caesars. Caesar would not allow anyone else to become a political ruler as long as he was the king. After the pagan Roman empire was broken up and Caesar was "taken out of the way," then this religious power would be revealed in its true light as a political–religious, persecuting power.

Once again we ask, Who could this power be? Certainly, God wants us to know, for the Bible talks about it over and over again. Within Daniel 7 alone there are over ten identifying characteristics of this power listed. In Revelation we find at least another ten. We have just looked at a few of them so far, but we have looked at enough of them that we should be able to make a tentative identification.

What religious power had its roots in Paul’s day, became involved with politics after the demise of the Caesars, began to persecute people on religious grounds, and had its headquarters among the countries of Europe? As we think about it, there is only one religious–political power of the Dark Ages that even remotely fits this description, but it fits every detail of the prophecy, and that is the Papacy of Rome.

Did the Papacy of Rome become a political ruler after the breakup of the pagan Roman Empire? Let a Catholic historian answer this question:

"Long ages ago, when Rome, through the neglect of the Western emperors, was left to the mercy of the barbarous hordes, the Romans turned to one figure for aid and protection, and asked him to rule them; . . . and thus. . . commenced the temporal sovereignty of the popes. And meekly stepping to the throne of Caesar, the vicar of Christ took up the scepter to which the emperors and kings of Europe were to bow in reverence through so many ages."—James P. Conroy, American Catholic Quarterly Review, April 1911.

Yes, it appears that the papal Roman government fits the description of the little horn of Daniel 7.

Now, friends, before going any further, let me share my convictions that there are many sincere and honest people in the Catholic Church. I am sure that many of them are good Christians. Sincere Catholic Christians who are here tonight, are here because they are real Christians who love the Lord and want to follow Him—that is why you have been coming to these prophecy seminar meetings. What we are looking at right now is a historical fulfillment of prophecy. We are looking at a religious–political system that arose in Rome after the demise of the Caesars—this was the papal government. We are looking at a system and a government, not at people who have a certain faith. Catholic people who love Jesus Christ and are following all the light they have are just as much the children of God as others who are following all the light they have.

What I am presenting tonight is in no way a condemnation of any person, but as a preacher of God’s Word, I must proclaim Bible truth. What we are just beginning to discover from Scripture is a truth that is very unpopular today; everyone is interested in ecumenicalism. Today people are more interested in ecumenicalism than truth. It would be well for everyone to get together if we were all following Christ, but even if all the world wonders after the beast, I don’t want to be among them, do you?

What we are beginning to discover from Scripture is not something new. I certainly did not discover it. All of the Protestant Reformers taught exactly what we are beginning to learn from these passages. They were themselves either Catholics or former Catholics, but they boldly protested against the powers of Rome, showing that it was indeed the little horn of Daniel 7 and the Beast of Revelation 13. That is why they were called Protestants—they protested against this power. Today it is far more popular to overlook this Bible truth that was taught by the Protestant Reformers.

Today a more palatable teaching has arisen which assigns this power to some future person who will arrive after the rapture of all the Christians. Or, if not a future person, then it must be a person who lived some time in the past, like Nero or Antiochus Epiphanes. So they say, "Don’t worry about these prophecies." It is far more popular to apply this prophecy to either the past or the future, but that is impossible to do and remain true to the Word. The Bible says that this power arose as a persecuting, political power after the breakup of the Roman Empire, but that it was arising as a religious power back in Paul’s day. The Bible also says that this power would last until the second coming of Jesus.

2 Thessalonians 2:7 "For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming."

So this was a power developing in Paul’s day, which would become a persecuting power in Europe after the breakup of Rome, and will exist until the coming of Jesus. What other power could this be? The Protestant Reformers boldly proclaimed this truth, but today it has almost been lost. Sad to say, most churches that call themselves Protestants aren’t Protestant at all, they have forgotten where their name came from.

Today, instead of protesting against the power, most Protestant churches have reached across the gulf and clasped their hands with papal Rome. As never before, all the world is even now beginning to wonder after this power.

But let us look further at this prophecy and make sure that all the different details of the prophecy fit. If even one description does not fit, then we have the wrong interpretation. The Bible gives over twenty identifying marks to help us identify this power. God does not want us to make any mistake. After all, He has given a very strict warning about following after this power or receiving its mark. First, let us read again Daniel 7:8.

Let us analyze this verse and see if every detail fits the Papacy:

1. It would be "another horn." It would be another power, separate from those that composed the various European countries that the pagan Roman Empire was originally broken up into. Does this fit the papal power? Yes.

2. Daniel saw it "coming up among" the other horns. Was the seat of the Papacy located among the countries of Europe? Yes.

3. "Before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots." Here is a part of the prophecy we have not yet dealt with. After the breakup of the Roman Empire and after the Caesars had left Rome, the bishops of Rome soon began to exercise political strength. During the Dark Ages, they sent out armies to capture Jerusalem from the Moslems, and by inquisitions they tried to conquer even cities of Europe that were not subservient to their control. But before the Papacy could assume its political power as a state, three of the countries of Europe had to be "uprooted."

Of the ten countries Europe was divided into, three of them did not accept the faith of the Catholic Church—they were Arian in belief, which means they believed in Jesus, but they did not believe exactly the same as the Papacy in regard to the Godhead. The trouble was that first one, and then another, of these Arian powers was in control of the area around Rome. The kings of these countries would not allow the Papacy to exercise any political authority.

These three countries were the Heruli, Vandals, and Ostrogoths. The Heruli were first in control of Italy. The king of the Heruli, Odoacer, even exercised his authority in the election of new popes. Any suggested names had to be brought to him for approval before election. The pope had no political power under the Herulian influence. The Heruli were overthrown by Theodoric, king of the Ostrogoths, in A.D. 493. That wasn’t much better for the pope, for Theodoric was an Arian also, but at least the pope now only had two Arian powers to contend with instead of three.

In order to get the pope’s support, Justinian, one of the last remaining Caesars with only Constantinople left under his control, turned the political fortunes of Rome over to the pope. But the pope could not act upon Justinian’s decree until the Ostrogoths were uprooted from Rome, for they did not recognize either the pope or Justinian. The Vandals were subsequently destroyed in A.D. 533 and the Ostrogoths were uprooted from Rome in A.D. 538, and soon completely destroyed. It was at this time, in A.D. 538, that the pope was finally able for the first time to actually become the civil (he had been a religious ruler for a long time) ruler of Rome and an active political leader of Europe.

Were these three powers the Heruli, Vandals, and Ostrogoths plucked up by the roots, so much so that no trace of them was left? Again, the prophecy fits.

4. "There, in this horn, were eyes like the eyes of a man." In the Bible, eyes represent the leading of God. Prophets were called "seers" (see 1 Samuel 9:9). The writings of the prophets are said to be "God’s Word." David says that God’s Word is "a lamp to my feet and a light to my path" (Psalm 119:105). But this power, instead of having divine eyes, has human eyes; that is, it is guided by human wisdom rather than God’s wisdom, human traditions instead of God’s Word. Is this true of the Catholic Church?

At the fourth session of the famous Council of Trent, April 5, 1546, the Catholic Church clearly stated in formal creed that it holds tradition to be of equal value with the Bible. And not only so, but "of the two (tradition and Scripture), tradition is to us (the Catholic Church) more clear and safe."—Joseph Faa’di Bruno, Catholic Belief, New York (Benziger Brothers), 1884, p. 45.

Not only is tradition held on a parity with the Bible, but the Bible itself was outlawed for the common people throughout the Middle Ages. It was only under the pressure of Protestantism that in the last seventy years it has not been considered a sin for a Catholic to read the Bible. So strongly did the Catholic Church want to keep people tied to the human traditions of the church that throughout the Dark Ages it was actually punishable by death to have or read a copy of the Scriptures or to translate it into the common language.

The Bible was actually placed on the "Index of Forbidden Books" by the Council of Valencia in the year 1229 with the following decree: "We prohibit also the permitting of the laity to have the books of the Old and New Testament."—Loraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism, Philadelphia (The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company), 1962, p. 97.

During the eighteenth century alone, at a time when great efforts were being made to translate the Bible into the different languages of the world, four different popes gave strict prohibition against anyone having the Bible in his own language. Typical of these statements is the official papal bull, Unigenitus, by Pope Clement XI, in 1713, which states: "We strictly forbid them (the laity) to have the books of the Old and New Testament in the vulgar (common) language." The people were forbidden to read the Bible for themselves. They were to learn religion only from the priests who had been immersed in human tradition.

Did the Catholic Church have human eyes instead of divine eyes? Let the record speak for itself. What did Jesus say about tradition?

Matthew 15:3 "But He answered and said to them, ‘Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?’ "

5. It had "a mouth speaking pompous words." Again, let us look at the official Catholic teachings. The Council of Trent defines papal power thus: "We define that the Holy Apostolic See and Roman Pontiff holds the primacy over the whole world."—Labbe and Cossart (A.C.), The Most Holy Councils, Vol. XIII, col. 1167.

When the triple crown is placed on the head of a new pope at his "coronation" ceremony, the ritual prescribes the following declaration by the officiating cardinal: "Receive the tiara adorned with three crowns, and know that thou art the Father of Princes and Kings, Ruler of the World, the Vicar of Our Savior Jesus Christ."

National Catholic Almanac

The New Catechism, under the section of the pope, states: "The pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth. . . . He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth." If someone were to make these same statements today, the whole world would be quick to condemn these boastful, blasphemous pronouncements. But somehow, age and tradition, pomp and ceremony, have glossed over these blasphemies.

Does the Papacy fit the prophecy that it would "speak pompous words"? Again, let the record speak for itself. Now let us look at the next text that continues to describe this power:

6. "Whose appearance was greater than his follows." He claimed to be greater than other rulers of Europe, forcing them to bow in submission to him. He reserved the right and often exercised the authority to set up or depose any that he should choose.

Daniel 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."

7. "He shall be different from the first ones." The papal power was different in that it was both a religious and a political power.

8. "He shall speak pompous words against the Most High." This agrees with what Paul says about this power in 2 Thessalonians 2, and what John says about it in Revelation 13. We have already noted the proud claims of the pope that he is ruler of the world. (You might remember what we studied in Daniel 2, that God is the ruler of this world.) This verse says his haughty statements would actually reach to the Most High God. Does this fit the Papacy? Let us look at just two examples: In an encyclical letter by Pope Leo XIII, on June 20, 1894 (notice, this is NOT that long ago, this was not during the Dark Ages, but was an official statement by a pope that ended his pontifical reign in this very century—903), he stated: "We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty." This is in the official records and can be checked out by any caring student. Could more pompous words be spoken? What else could possibly be said to more accurately fit the description?

Moreover, the pope is declared to be infallible when speaking ex cathedra according to Vatican Council I in 1870, again, not that long ago.

9. "He. . . shall persecute the saints of the Most High." That the Catholic Church hunted down, tortured, and burned people at the stake throughout the Middle Ages hardly even needs to be said. That is common history. In one sweep in the year 1208, a crusade organized by Pope Innocent III crushed out the lives of a million Waldenses and Albigenses in upper Italy and lower France. Their crime? They were teaching and disseminating copies of the Scriptures to people throughout Europe in their own language.

Estimates range from the most conservative figure of around 50,000,000 upwards to much larger numbers of martyrs who lost their lives during the Dark Ages at the hands of the Catholic Church during the years of its supremacy.

Does the prophecy fit? Again, history speaks for itself. As even the Roman Catholic paper, the Western Watchman, declared, "The church has persecuted, only a tyro (one uninformed in church history) will deny that."—December 24, 1909.

10. "And shall intend to change times and law." Finally, after giving us many other identifying signs, Daniel gives the greatest and most serious identifying mark found in the Bible. This power would tamper with God’s immutable law, even intending to change it. The authority of a ruler is determined by his ability to make laws. Only a higher authority can change the law of another. Only a higher court can overturn the decision of a lower court. For a power to attempt to change or modify God’s law would indicate that he not only considers himself to be equal with God, but actually of greater authority than God Himself. Does the Catholic Church fulfill this portion of the prophecy? Does she claim this authority? Again, let the record speak:

Lucius Ferraris, in his Prompta Bibliotheca, an official Catholic book, declares: "The pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not a mere man, but as it were God, and the vicar of God. . . . Moreover the superiority and the power of the Roman Pontiff. . . are even over angels, than whom he is greater. . . The pope is as it were God on earth. . . (and) is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine laws."

Imagine, he claims that he can modify God’s holy law. He claims higher authority than God Himself. God Himself must stand at the tribunal of the pope to be tried and approved? Yes, very pompous words indeed against God.

2 Thessalonians 2:3 "Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God."

And how would he exalt himself above God? By disregarding His laws:

2 Thessalonians 2:7 "For the mystery of LAWLESSNESS is already at work."

Our verse in Daniel 7:25 not only reveals that this power would seek to exalt itself above God by trying to change His laws, but it even specifies which law of the Decalogue the papal power would intend to change—the one involving time. If we look at God’s laws, the Ten Commandments, we find only one of these commandments dealing with time, and that is the Sabbath commandment that requires us to worship on the seventh–day Sabbath. If the papal system is actually going to "intend" (it will be something it intentionally does—it will "intend") to change the law regarding time, it would have to be the Sabbath commandment it tries to change. (The Sabbath commandment is generally referred to as the fourth, but in Catholic catechisms and some Protestant confessions, it is designated as the third. In this discussion, we shall consistently consider the Sabbath commandment the fourth.) Has this power tried and intended to change the fourth commandment? Let us examine the historical records.

In the 18th General (or Ecumenical) Council of the Catholic Church, the Council of Trent, held from 1545 to 1563 (quite a lengthy council), the church officially stated: "It pleased the church of God, that the religious celebration of the Sabbath day should be transferred to ‘the Lord’s day (meaning Sunday)’ "—Catechism of the Council of Trent, p. 4. It then goes on to explain the reasons for the change. The Catholic Church admits that she changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. Listen to the author of The Faith of Missions, Reverend John A. O’Brien of Notre Dame University, published by Our Sunday Visitor, Copyright 1974. "Let me address myself to my dear non–Catholic reader: You believe that the Bible alone is a safe guide in religious matters. You also believe that one of the fundamental duties enjoined upon you by your Christian faith is that of Sunday observance. But where does the Bible speak of such an obligation? I have read the Bible from the first verse of Genesis to the last verse of Revelation, and have found no reference to the duty of sanctifying the Sunday. The day mentioned in the Bible is not the Sunday, the first day of the week, but the Saturday, the last day of the week"—pp. 136, 137. He then goes on to explain how the church changed the day.

Again, the Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, a catechism that received the "apostolic blessing" of Pope Pius X, speaks of this change in a question–answer form:

"Question: Which is the Sabbath day?

"Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day?

"Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?

"Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in the Council of Laodicea (A.D. 364), transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday."

History shows that the Catholic Church is the one that changed the day. The Catholic Church herself admits to it. In fact, this is what she claims as the proof of her power. God’s authority is based upon His ability to make laws. The pope claims to be equal with God, and claims to be in effect above God, and the proof of that claim is that he can change God’s law. Let us take a few minutes to note how the change came about.

History of the Change

It was in Rome where Sunday was first kept, possibly even within a few decades after the death of the apostles. The bishop of Rome decided it would be a good idea to celebrate a certain festival with the pagans in Rome, the festival of Ishtar, which was held about the same time as the Passover and Jesus’ resurrection. The bishop declared this to be a celebration of Christ’s resurrection. You will recognize the resemblance between Ishtar and Easter.

The yearly Sunday observance was gradually followed by a weekly Sunday observance, also in honor of the resurrection. The pagan world already kept this day in honor of the sun. Soon the bishop declared it to be a holy day. Now there were two holy days, Saturday and Sunday (they are still called holidays). Gradually more and more people began to worship on Sunday and fewer and fewer on Sabbath. Finally, a Sunday law was passed by the first Christian emperor, Constantine, in A.D. 321. This was a famous Sunday law by the first Christian emperor, but it should be noted that this Sunday law was enacted before Constantine became a Christian. In this law, Sunday is called "the Venerable Day of the Sun." The sun was the god of the pagan religion, and Sunday was the day on which the sun was worshipped. The Catholic Church changed the solemnity of the Sabbath to Sunday in the Council of Laodicea in A.D. 364. This change of the Sabbath has no other authority than a decree from the pope of Rome.

Protestant Confessions

Is this a historically recognized fact? We have already studied the boastful claims of the Catholic Church in this regard. How about Protestant historians? Do they agree with the Catholic historians in this regard?

The Protestant, Dr. William Pryne, in his "Dissertation on the Lord’s Day," says, "The seventh–day Sabbath was solemnized by Christ, the apostles and the primitive Christians until the Laodicean Council in Rome in A.D. 364 did, in a manner, quite abolish the observance of it. . . . The council in Laodicea first settled the observance of it."

Martin Luther said in the "Augsburg Confession," Article 28, par 9: "The Catholics allege the Sabbath changed into Sunday contrary to the Ten Commandments, it appears. Neither is there any example more boasted of than the changing of the Sabbath day. ‘Great,’ say they, ‘is the (Catholic) Church who can dispense with one of the Ten Commandments.’ "

Dr. Binney, of the Methodist Church, who wrote the theological textbook for the Methodist Seminary, The Methodist Episcopal Theological Compendium, says in this book, "It is true there is no positive command (in the Bible) for keeping holy the first day of the week"—p. 103.

Dr. Edward T. Hiscox, author of the Baptist Manual, in a paper read before a New York Ministers’ Conference, November 13, 1893, said, "There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath was not Sunday. It will, however, be readily said, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week, with all its duties, privileges and sanctions. Earnestly desiring information on this subject, which I have studied for many years, I ask: Where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament—absolutely not. There is no scriptural evidence of the change of the Sabbath institution from the seventh to the first day of the week. . . . Of course, I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history as a religious day, as we learn from the Christian Fathers and other sources. But what a pity that it comes branded with the mark of paganism and christened with the name of the sun–god, then adopted and sanctified by the papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism."

Toronto, October 27, 1949 (BUP), "Reverend Philip Carrington, Anglican Archbishop of Quebec, sent local clergymen into a huddle today by saying outright that there was nothing to support Sunday being kept holy. Carrington defiantly told a church meeting in this city of straight–lace Protestantism that tradition, not the Bible, had made Sunday the day of worship. He quoted the biblical commandment which said the seventh day should be one of rest, and then stated: ‘That is Saturday. Nowhere in the Bible is it laid down that worship should be done on Sunday,’ the Archbishop told a hushed, still audience."

Yes, there are many ministers and church historians who know the truth about the Sabbath and Sunday. Of course, there are not many preaching it, for it is hard to preach something you don’t live. But there are a faithful few who are both keeping the Sabbath and preaching it. I think of one Sabbath–keeping minister who one day was riding on a train through the Midwest. At one stop a group of preachers boarded, evidently on their way to some convention. One of them sat down by this brother and they began to discuss their work. They had learned that both were ministers but neither had mentioned his particular affiliation. As they rode along, this man said to our brother, "Say, you aren’t thinking of coming to this section of the country to be a pastor are you?" Our minister replied, "No, but why do you ask?" The other preacher said, "This is the most miserable place to pastor a church I have ever seen. In the winter it is bitter cold and nobody will come out to church. In the summer it is so hot nobody will come, and in the spring and fall, when it is so nice, they all go out for recreation. They come to church only once or twice a year." Our friend said, "Why don’t you preach them a sermon and tell them that they should be faithful in coming to church and not to seek their own pleasure on the Lord’s day?" The other minister answered, "Whenever you talk about Sabbath–keeping, the people question which day is the Sabbath and some say the Seventh–day Adventists are right. I find it better not to talk about it." Well, our brother decided to ask one more question: "Listen, why don’t you take your Bible and once and for all prove to them that Sunday is the Sabbath and that the day has been changed." And the minister looked straight at our brother and said, "You know that cannot be done!"

Dear friend, that is true. Any Christian who has studied this subject knows it cannot be done. The Bible testifies to God’s seventh–day Sabbath. That is the only day God wants us to keep.

The Mark of the Beast

As noted, the Catholic Church boastfully claims that the mark of her authority is her ability to change God’s law, to change God’s day of worship from the seventh day to the first day of the week. As the Sabbath is God’s mark of authority and the sign of His true followers (Ezekiel 20:17, 20), so the change of God’s law is the mark of the Beast’s authority.

Revelation 13:3 "All the world marveled and followed the beast."

Paul says, "Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin to death, or of obedience to righteousness?" (Romans 6:16).

Today, the world is obeying the pope instead of God. As Father Segur, a Catholic writer, put it in his book, Plain Talks About the Protestantism of Today, p. 213: "The keeping of Sunday by the Protestants is an homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the (Catholic) Church."

The Papacy claims to be equal with God in authority on earth. The mark or seal of that authority is its ability to change God’s holy law—specifically the Sabbath law, and we receive that mark by keeping its day. Yet, the Bible says, "To him that knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin" (James 4:17). God is merciful. He gives us time and opportunities to learn His truth and does not hold us accountable until such time. But before Jesus’ second coming, God is going to have a commandment–keeping people upon this earth. After describing those who receive the mark of the Beast, notice how God describes His people who have not received the mark of the Beast, but who have been sealed with His name.

Revelation 14:12 "Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus."

You Must Choose

We have presented some very plain truths tonight. Far be it from us to have any animosity toward any people or any system, regardless of what they may have done. May we be filled with only love and compassion. God is and will be the judge of all atrocities. And yet God wants us to recognize this power for what it is. In fact, we have gone over only half the identifying marks. God wanted to make VERY sure we recognized this power, for it has made some very great boasts against Him and has sought to change His law.

While we do not want to hold any animosity, neither should we overlook the plain warnings of God. Today it is very fashionable to sympathize with the criminal, the murderer, and the rapist (sometimes they almost become heroes) and to forget all about the victims. Sometimes when things are pointed out about the Papacy, as they have been tonight, some people become very sympathetic for the papal power because these things have been openly exposed. I certainly take no delight in exposing these facts about the papal system, but God’s Word enjoins me to do so. The love for your soul, dear friend, forces me to make plain these prophecies of God’s Word.

Yet, if we are going to sympathize, shouldn’t it be with the more than 50,000,000 people the Bible calls saints who were tortured and martyred at the hands of this power throughout the Dark Ages? If we are going to sympathize, shouldn’t it be with God, whose authority has been challenged and undermined by the claims of a mere, boastful man?

Today the world is choosing between the pomp, ceremonies and authority of man, and the simplicity, humility, and authority of Jesus Christ, the Creator. Today we stand at the crossroads of eternity. It is a choice that must be made. What choice will you make?

I close with this appeal:

Joshua 24:15 "And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord."

Tomorrow night we are going to look at the two women and the tribulation. Many people today are terrified about the period of the great tribulation prophesied in the Bible. But Bible prophecy has great comfort and hope for all in the refuge of God’s protecting care, if we will only follow the Lamb Jesus and be obedient.

Return to the Blessed Hope Home Page
Last Updated: 06/18/03