St. Peter Is Not The Antichrist

Some people use Vicarius Filii Dei to prove that the Pope is the antichrist. They use the Donation of Constantine as a primary proof. These people will search endlessly for verification that the Pope was referred to as Vicarius Filii Dei. This video explains a problem with that, because the Donation of Constantine refers specifically to the Apostle Peter as Vicarius Filii Dei, and nobody in their right mind would consider St Peter to be the antichrist.

In the link below you will see a website where the author goes to great lengths to show that Vicarius Filii Dei is legitimate.
http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/666.htm

I made this video so that they can see that at the end of the day they have made such a broad argument that they are even making Apostles into antichrists.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Pope
• antichrist
• 666
• donation
• of
• constantine

[Bingolly1]

The document only referred to Peter and not his successors. Then people seem to overlook the important fact that 666 is the NAME of a man and not the TITLE of a man. Some how those who use this overlook that important fact. Good work and GB

[BeingBob]

@Bingolly1 They ignore a lot of facts ;)

GBU

[SteveSpitz1981]

The problem with the "vicarius filii dei" arguments is that the pope has NEVER gone by that title verbatim. The pope is sometimes referred to as the "vicar of Christ" which when translated to Latin appears as "vicarius Christi" which, numerically, only adds up to 214... obviously not 666 (the number of the beast). So it's evident a title was sought (i.e. fabricated) that would equate to 666 and one that resembles the pope's more genuine title.

[BeingBob]

@SteveSpitz1981 You're right. I did this mainly because I came across a website and individuals who go to any lengths to link vicarius Filii Dei to the Pope (or the Pope to the antichrist), because this phrase means antichrist to them, that they're actually convicting apostles and their own prophets. I put a link to the website I was referring to in the video notes. Most of his arguments are absurd, but it's obvious that he went through a lot of trouble gathering all of that and making a case.

[rusda2]

Bob, actually historic prots use of VFD as one of many identifying marks of antichrist are not calling peter antichrist at all...reason being that historic prots do not accept the idea of peter or anyone else as a pope in the first place. the idea of pontiff came out of pagan rome first (pontifex maximus) then was bequeathed upon peter later by the roman church, so it is a purely catholic idea, not one that historic prots accept. therefore historic prots are not calling peter antichrist at all.

[rusda2]

hBTW, hope youre having a great holiday :)

[rusda2]

HI Bob, actually Ellen White does not add up to 666 (not that it matters really) but the letter W, tho it did exist in old roman numerals, had a value of 800 by itself and that alone exceeds 666 by a good clip. in modern roman numerals W has no value. most importantly, SDA (historic protestants) do not base the pope/RCC identity merely on 666, there is much other biblical evidence that supports it. if VFD was all we had it would not even be used.