Let's try one very simple question at a time. Do you believe that the Pope of the Catholic Church is now or at some point in the future will be either the prophet of the AntiChrist or the AntiChrist? I don't see how it's the least bit unreasonable for any Catholic to know at least that much about what an obvious anti-Catholic believes prior to discussing anything with them.
No, i do not believe that the pope is the The False Prophet or the AntiChrist, nor anyone i know of now, though i can think of someone more fitting.
As for whether a pope could be either, i certainly allow that, but it seems some of your own did, or at least those of your schismatic sedevacantist brethren, (http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/section1.pdf) though they seem to be more tolerated.
The Catholic bishop Arnulf of Orleans was the first to apply the 'man of sin' prophecy in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-9 to the papacy.[7][26] The same interpretation was given by the Catholic abbot Joachim of Floris in 1190[7] and the archbishop Eberhard II in 1240. — EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume IV, Appendix I, fifth edition, 1862; Leroy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers, volume I (1950) pages 541-542
However, if your interrogation is for the purpose of determining whether i am anti-Catholic, then i think i have made that clear, as you have that you are anti-Protestant. The issue is on what basis. On our part the question is whether it is a result finding Scripture to be the assured word of God and thus seeking to go whether Scripture leads, and resulting in affirming truths we both affirm on the weight of Scriptural evidence, and contending against those who deny them, as well as against those teachings we find as being a product of Rome making dogma out of mere traditions of men. Or whether opposition is due to some other reason, as often is alleged.
I am not motivated by any personal animosity toward Rome, and had no real negative personal events there, and my leaving many years ago was done prayerfully. And here i have sought reasonable exchange, and a higher level of substantive debate than simply name calling and such, though this can be hard. But neither are we to sit docile in the midst of the constant (and i meant constant) promotion of teachings of Rome and here as the one true Church©. And if you will assert such, then you cannot complain when it is challenged point by point.
And rather than broadbrushing, you have more reason to deal with opposition as individuals, if such are not preaching a particular church, as you do. Yet we also must deal with Roman Catholics as individuals, as some are more Traditional and others are quite liberal, and some want JP2 canonized while others blast him. But rather than interrogating every Roman Catholics i think that if one show them self reasonable then exchange may be possible.
If someone won't answer some very simple questions prior to engaging in conversation there is no reason to believe they want to have a conversation or that they are in fact a reasonable person worthy of engaging in conversation. Those who will not answer such simple questions are in reality saying, "yes, birds of a feather flock together, but I like to pretend I'm not really one of the vultures".
Rashputin, i saw interrogation as a regards herring in contrast to their real issues, and your one-size-fits-all response of overall misrepresentation (which was not in response to my post) and responsive interrogation hardly evidences openness to discussion, but which i think my reasoned reply to the veracity of the substantial issues behind your unreasonable rant did, rather than replying in kind. But if your defense of Rome means that you cannot engage anti-Catholics who seek to stick with real issues, and allow they can have sincere reasons for doing so, without you resorting to your manner of response at issue, then continue to do as you have.
Actually, I only know a few Catholics who I've met of late since deciding the Catholic Church is right and no matter who doesn't like it, it is the One True Church founded by Christ Himself and entrusted to His Apostles. The One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church teaches the same things today it has taught ever since Pentecost. Not a single one of the Self Alone groups that grew out of the Self focused revolt against the One True Church still exists as it did at that time and none of the tens of thousands of fragments those Self centered doctrines have bred teaches all of Christianity as it was taught by Christ and His Apostles. That's not anti-Protestant a bit and the fact I that spend the majority of my time with Lutherans and Southern Baptists rather than Catholics hadn't crossed my mind. I really do need to spend more time with Catholic folks, you're right about that much at least.
What I am is very much against those pretending to be Protestant Christians but who are in reality not Christian, not Protestant, and not anything else except Self Centered anti-Catholics cooperating with the humanist crowd to fragment non-Catholics and constantly attack Catholics.
The fact is, the only place I run into those who claim a) to be Christian, and b) to be Protestant Christians, and who cannot live without attacking the Catholic Church while claiming to infallibly interpret Scripture as they take their daily walk across the surface of the local lake, is right here. Here those who insist they are not anti-Catholic in the least ignore every one of the openly anti-Cathlic liars even when they insist that Christ was not fully human and fully God. At the very least, its interesting that such an assertion seems to bother so few non-Catholic folks. Obviously, they ignore the known numbskulls and just stay on the sidelines most of the time although now and then the numbskulls do wonder into a thread they didn’t start and are quit clearly put in their place by some of the many fine non-Catholic Christians who frequent FR.
"But neither are we to sit docile in the midst of the constant (and i meant constant) promotion of teachings of Rome and here as the one true Church©. "
Well isn't that sweet, you can't remain docile in the face of history. Do you also refuse to remain docile when someone says the Moors once ruled Spain or that there was a revolution in Russia in 1917?
"But if your defense of Rome means that you cannot engage anti-Catholics who seek to stick with real issues, and allow they can have sincere reasons for doing so, without you resorting to your manner of response at issue, then continue to do as you have. "
I don't defend "Rome" , do recognize the use of “Rome” rather than Catholic is a deliberate slur, and only defend the Catholic Church when someone posts an article attacking it. Something those who each have their own “Christian in Name Only" religion, deny the Deity of Christ, and consider Christmas and Easter both to be pagan holidays, can't seem to resist posting in an endless cycle repeating the same handful of lies as topics and using thinly veiled repetitions of anti-Cathlic lies from a popular comic books series as their primary source. Each and every one continues to repeat lies from sources long after many posters have produced more than adequate proof that their sources are lies. Lies from sources that have been debunked as lies not only by Catholics, but by academics who are shocked that shoddy research mixed with fantasy is accepted as nonfiction material are only repeated by liars, right?.
Such folks routinely slander not just the Catholic Church, but with their non-Christian definition of Christianity they slander all Christians, as well. Such is the result of those who each and every one interpret Scripture for themselves. Side with such folks, continue your own personal argumentation and discussion, while ignoring the lies and total fabrications mixed in with your comments, never even take notice of or correct those lies and fabrications, and it's obvious that simply not "remaining docile" is the least of your objectives. Joining liars and ignoring their lies is collaboration with those liars, not some sort of aloofness. As for not being Catholic? Fine with me, I'm not the Holy Spirit. Those who sincerely study Christianity will become Catholic or Orthodox if they are not now, and if they do not, may God have mercy on their souls.
So much for one borderline pseudo-answer that very carefully avoids distancing yourself from the professional liars who routinely post slanders against Christ, Christianity, and the Catholic Church. I like the, "some of my best friends are black folks" non-denial denial that you do in fact believe the Pope will be the AntiChrist or the prophet of the AntiChrist, too. It must hurt to attempt such verbal tap steps when you only know how to polka and square dance.
Now, do you agree with those who say both Christmas and Easter are pagan holidays, and how can you possibly object to anything anyone says they get from Scripture since you advocate and practice self interpretation of Scripture?
Though it may be impossible for some to show respect and appreciate your honest AND scholarly input, let me declare that if I had to choose between what they call their “pearls” and yours, I will take what you represent. You speak for the Pearl of Great Price, Jesus Christ the righteous and the truth of the Gospel of salvation by grace through faith - THE Gospel. Thank you.