Mr Horn's interpretation of the Malachy prophecy is completely and utterly baseless. And he wrote a book about it?
That Malachy prophecy states: "In the extreme persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will sit Peter the Roman, who WILL FEED THE SHEEP in many
The Malachy prophecy states clearly that Peter Romanus will "FEED THE SHEEP through many tribulations."
What exactly did Jesus say about "feeding the sheep"?
You cannot be expected to know every word that Jesus spoke, your ignorance is currently acceptable.
Let's remove that ignorance.
If You know what Jesus said about "feeding the sheep" you would know that the Petrus Romanus prophecy is supposed to be about a Pope that serves and
What was Jesus' DIVINE REQUEST to his servant that LOVED HIM ?
(John 21:17): "The third time Jesus said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do
you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.” Jesus said, (than you must) 'FEED MY SHEEP'" (John 21:17)
There it is, Jesus said to the Apostle Peter (the first Pope) that for him to Love Jesus is for him(Peter) to FEED HIS SHEEP.
It is completely ridiculous for SOMEONE TO BELIEVE THE MALACHY PROPHECY IS FROM HEAVEN and at the same time to BELIEVE that it means anything other
than what Jesus stated about a religious leader that actually "FEEDS THE SHEEP!"
IF Jesus requested of Peter I, to "feed my sheep"...
AND LATTER IF Jesus comes down from heaven or His angels descend to utter a prophecy to a Bishop about a Peter II that actually does "FEED the
you should be able to understand that Jesus/Angel is clearly stating in context that just as the first Pope was to Feed the Sheep, the last Pope will
also be a Peter that SHALL LOVE AND SERVE GOD WITH ALL HIS HEART AND SHALL "feed the sheep" of the world (with spiritual food) in SERVICE TO THE
GREAT SHEPHERD (Jesus).
This is not an endorsement of the Malachy prophecy, only a complete rejection of a totally baseless interpretation of it .
It is far more decent and logical to believe the Malachy prophecy is a fake than to believe an absurd interpretation that embodies the exact opposite
of it's original form.
edit on 5-6-2012 by Phantomfire707 because: (no reason given)