Christian or Catholic?

[NeedHimForever]

So your defense is non catholics are wrong, but you fail to address why the bible YOUR religion uses during its gatherings contradicts what the guy in the black dress teaches his flock.

Forget protestants. I don't put myself under that sign as it means nothing to me. I could care less about Luther, and/or any/every denomination in existence.

There are many different versions / translations of the Bible, (counting out witnesses') In these end times God would not allow us to lack the scriptures needed in order to learn what he wants from us, why he wants it, and what he did for us. The salvation message is all too clear for anyone that can read. If I air dropped Bibles into a remote village that has never had contact with the outside world (assume they can read whatever language the Bible is printed in), If those people read through from cover to cover they would join the ranks of God's children. I guarantee you that if the decided to gather to worship their "services" would look nothing like what you see in Mass every Sunday. Furthermore since they wouldn't have any outside influence, they would not partake in any PAGAN traditions that are so closely tied to the rcc. I live in a country that is 95% catholic. I see it every single day and it makes me sick to watch these poor lost souls wandering aimlessly with no hope and no peace.

We don't need a pope, bishops or priests to tell us what to believe. The Bible is its own authority and is simple enough that even children can understand it and OBEY IT.

Which brings me back to the question you so conveniently keep dodging with pointless "one true church, you guys are splinter cells and because of that are wrong rhetoric"
When push comes to shove, your religion is built on sand, while faith in the Bible with the guidance of the Holy Spirit is firmly cemented in stone. A slight trickle of Biblical truth washes your foundation away.

I am going to have nightmares trying to comprehend how anyone with the ability to read and use logic could ever go from God's word to a religion that is huge steps from the truth. What kind of terrible event caused you to blatantly disobey God's word and join the ranks of a religion that undermines his authority? Your spiritual leader allows people to BOW in front of him and worship him! You refer to him as Holy Father!

These facts don't bother you? They make me furious! Millions of souls being taught doctrines straight from the mouth of lucifer under the disguise of God's one true church.
I would hate to be in the shoes of the captain of the SS Deceipt when Jesus returns. That meltdown in the temple will pale in comparison, and rightly so. Rightly so.

 

[Boanerges]

How is Seminary Matt?

Thanks so much for the lesson but your ideas are indeed old news.
This is the condescending attitude I spoke of earlier. Please remove the log out of your eye my friend.



Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria (where the Septuagent was translated), did not include the Apocrypha as part of the Old Testament canon. In a letter, Athanasius listed the 22 Old Testament books and the 27 canonical books of the New Testament. He added:

"These are the fountains of salvation, that they who thirst may be satisfied with the living words they contain. In these ALONE (my emphasis) is proclaimed the doctrine of godliness." (Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, "Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers," Second Series, vol. IV, St. Athanasius, "Letter 39.6" (Grand Rapids:Eerdmans, 1953), p. 552)

Jerome certainly agreed with Athanasius, for he did not include the Apocrypha in his Latin translations of the Old Testament because, he said, they were not part of the Hebrew canon. He admitted the Apocrypha were useful, but not authoritative for declaring or confirming doctrine. In a commentary on two apocryphal books, The Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus, Jerome wrote:

"As, then, the Church reads Judith, Tobit, and the books of the Maccabees, but does not admit them among the canonical Scriptures, so let it also read these two volumes for the edification of the people, not to give authority to doctrines of the Church…I say this to show you how hard it is to master the book of Daniel, which in the Hebrew contains neither the history of Susanna, nor the hymn of the three youths, nor the fables of Bel and the Dragon…" (Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, "Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers," Second Series, vol. VI, St. Jerome, "Prefaces to Jerome's Works, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, Daniel" (Grand Rapids:Eerdmans, 1954), pp. 492-93)

With that in mind, let us closely look at your knowledge and your Bible.

The Protestant movement of the 1500's denied the Old Testament of the Catholic Church and claimed the "Hebrew" Torah
This in itself brings a question into your theology.

That simply corrects the bad theology of the RCC and people in bondave were set free.
The Bible itself tells us the the Jews were entrusted by God with the Oracles (Word) of God and the Jews (except a few cultists) flatly rejected the Apocrypha as scripture.
Also many early Christians did not receive the Apocrypha as scripture but did believe it was a moral teaching.





If all authority is in the Bible alone, and if Our Lord said not even the gates of hell shall prevail against her. Then by your own version of the truth, Christians were reading a different version of the Bible for 1200 yrs before your reformation ( that's more than twice as long as your current Protestant line is now ) than clearly the Bible Alone belief could not have been correct for countless generations of Christians before you.
Secondly, it obviously brings into the arena the question that Hell did indeed prevail for 1200 yrs.
That which you speak of was a political/religious empire and not the church.
Jesus always had a remnant even in the dark ages.
I trust in the truth and claims of Our Lord Jesus Christ.... do you?
Yes.
Or do you simply accept what has been handed onto you by men?
That seems to be more of a problem with the Papacy and it's followers than the Protestants.
Now, if your acceptance of the "Hebrew" version is based simply on that recorded in Hebrew, than the fact that Hebrew versions of Ecclesiasticus and Tobit which predate Our Lord, having been discovered since 1896, should by your claim, now be included in your Old Testament. To deny this is to accept "Traditions of Men" on your part.
Nope wrong again. It is the Word of God speaking of the Jewish people declares:
Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.


To claim you only accept that which was accepted by the Jewish councils, is to accept the fact that the Jews did not close their cannon until the council of Jamnia in approx 70AD
At that same council, those same members passed a curse on all followers of Christ.

I am not a Jew.......I am a Christian.

[18] for if the righteous man is God's son, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries. (Mt.27:43).
[19] Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance.
[20] Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected."
[21] Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray, for their wickedness blinded them,
[22] and they did not know the secret purposes of God, nor hope for the wages of holiness, nor discern the prize for blameless souls;
[23] for God created man for incorruption, and made him in the image of his own eternity,
[24] but through the devil's envy death entered the world, and those who belong to his party experience it.



Stop and think. Why would the same Pharisees who condemned Jesus 40 yrs before, at a time when Christians were growing in number, choose to claim the above scripture was not inspired and remove it?

Pax Tecum ( Especially to you Rojo )
Fallen Knight

Your interpretation is completely out of sync with the truth.
Money for the forgiveness of sin is just one of a plethera of un-Christian doctrines one winds up with when that one interjects the heresy of the Apocrypha into scripture.




some quotes taken from Jesus is Savior

 

[rojoloco]

After realising, as I have previously stated, that every Bible only church interprets the Holy Bible only in the way that they individually see it, and remembering Our Lord's promise that HIS church would be led in the ways of ALL truth, and that not even the gates of hell shall prevail against her, I realised 2 things.

First, you have a flaw in your logic here. You say that you disliked how each denomination had their own personal interpretation of Scripture. As a result, you chose a different group that had their own interpretation as well. The difference is that you say they are infallible. You do not ascribe this possibility to Baptists or any other group but for some reason, you say the Catholic Church must be the ones who got it right. You condemned an action but then followed it wholeheartedly. The difference is that instead of picking one who interprets the Bible with the Bible, you picked one who interprets the Bible with whatever made up tradition they could think of. You are forgetting that Paul tells us we know in part. As a result, error is open to us all. Christ's Church will never fail and the Truth will always be preserved from error but any group of man has the capacity for error. Heck Paul rebuked Peter in his error and Peter is viewed as the father of Catholicism. If even he could be wrong, how much more so the priesthood that carried on over the centuries (despite the fact that Scripture tells of the priesthood ending)?

Rojoloco claims that I have reduced myself to name calling and stirring up trouble. Please show me Rojo, where I am name calling??? Also in regards to stirring up trouble, your definition of that obviously is based on the fact that if a Protestant slams a Catholic with falsehood or half truths then that is acceptable ( look at who started this thread ) but if a Catholic points outs your floors then he is stirring???

You reduced yourself to that level when you told him, "Try googling "porn". You may find people more akin to your mindset there." That had nothing to do with the thread at hand, sparked nothing but strife, and was a reaction instead of a response. If you read, I did not place all the blame on you. I placed it on both of you. It is perfectly fine to slam the belief of another so long as you are prepared to give a defense and do it in love. I will never slam you (I might slam your belief but never you as a person) but you will see me be VERY harsh toward Catholicism.

I too enjoy spirited debate. I too attempt to keep it at a level above the gutter, because I acknowledge the hearts of good people regardless of denomination. Will you join me? Or do you only rely on name calling?

I'm game but like I said, I did not read the other 20 pages all the way so I might repeat some things. Bear with me.

 

[iamamazed]

Catholic means Uni-versal. Why is that so threatening?

 

[Donald]

woman who rides the beast

It is nice to see that there are others who are aware of this false bride. Mathew 13 speaks of the wheat and the tares this also points to the bride of the anti-christ - those who seem to have a form of godliness but deny the power of God. They have been planted by Satan in amongst the wheat to cause the wheat to be strangled. Be careful out there they are so like the real thing that they seem to have been born again. They do everything we as true christians do but when you listen to their doctrine (teachings) you will see that they are false. I am concerned for the young christians who may get caught up in their web of hypocracy. If you have just recently been born again ensure that you get grounded in your faith.

They also embrace all so called christian faiths, including the Roman Catholic Church, Jehovah Witnesses, etc. The movement is called the eccumenical movement. They try to bring all these so called christian churches together in unity. They are known to me as the bride of ther anti-christ. They will readily embrace the anti-christ when he is revealed.

Revelation 17 speaks of the Woman who rides the beast. This is a detailed account of that woman - the Roman Caholic Church.

Rev 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

There are seven mountains that are about the Vatican.

It is just what it says is it not: Roman, as in Roman Empire, and Catholic Church speak of the church of this world. She is drunk on the blood of the martyrs.

 

[shipwrecksoul]

I got BIG headache after reading all these posts!

But let God be true and every man a liar!

Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

But to my comment directly on this post you have to go back a few replies.

 

[Donald]

Roman catholics

I got BIG headache after reading all these posts!

But let God be true and every man a liar!

Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

But to my comment directly on this post you have to go back a few replies.

Thanks for answering my thread on this subject. You did not give much as to what you were attempting to say to me regarding my previous thread so I have responded with what is hereunder.

I have read a previous thread of yours which you gave a reply to the subject at hand and it is good that we share the whole truth with everyone including Roman Catholics. However the Word of God is what judges the heart and if it is not proclaimed how will those caught up in such things know any different from what they are believing. As stewards of the Word of God we must share the whole truth in love not that which seems to tickle their ears. It is good to quote scripture because this is what judges the heart not the person who is quoting it. Hebrews 4:12 specifically says "The word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of the soul and spirit and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Romans 3:4 you quoted above declares just that ... that if man attempts to interpret the Word of God in his own light he will inevitably teach his own thoughts and own deductions and therefore would be a liar. Ezek 13 talks of the false shepards who came teaching lies. If he teaches the Word because he is one walking in relationhsip with God and the Holy Spirit is enlightening his/her heart to the truth of scripture then God be true because He is giving that person the correct interpretation to the scriptures. Exodus 12 clearly states that the lamb given for sacrifice had to be perfect without blemish (Ex 12:5). They were to eat the flesh roasted with fire and enleavened bread (Ex12:8). This points to the Word of God, it must be given and eaten and must be without defect or blemish. The fact that it was roasted on the fire points to the judgement Jesus Christ, the true Lamb of God, suffered in His body for our sins. Read John 6 to get more on this.

The good woman of the bible point to the bride of Christ and the bad the bride of the anti-christ, the harlot that seduces people away from the truth just like the serpent who twisted the words of God and caused the fall of the whole human race. Proverbs 2 clearly gives a warning not to follow after the harlot, the seducer because it will cause one to fall.

It starts with "My son, if thou wilt receive my words, and hide my commandments with thee, so that thou incline thine ear unto wisdon and apply thine heart to understanding, Yea if you criest after knowledge and liftest up thy voice for understanding. If thou seekest her as silver, and searches for her as for hid treasures; Then shalf thou unders the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God. For the Lord giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding. He layeth up sound wisdon for the righteous: he is a buckler to them that walk uprightly. He keepeth the paths of judgement and preserveth the way of his saints. Then shalt thou understand righeousness , judgement, and equity; yea every good path. When widon entereth into thine heart, and knowledge is pleasant unto thy sould; Discretion shall preserve thee, understanding shall keep thee; To delverr thee from the way of the evil man , from the man that speaketh froward things; Who leave the paths of uprightness to walk in the ways of darkness ; Who rejoice to do evil, and delight in the frowardness of the wicked; whose wasy are crooken, and they froward in their paths; to deliver thee from the strange woman, even from the stranger which flattereth with her words; Which forsaketh the guide of her youth, and forgetteth the covenant of her God. For her house inclineth ujto death, and her paths unto the dead. None that go unto her return again, neither take they hold of the paths of life..... Proverbs 2:1-18.

I love Roman Catholics and Jehovah Witnesses but their doctrine is not in line with scripture and what they are doing is neither. Therefore their way leads to death, eternal separation from God and therefore my post was to in short to attempt to show others and to make them besare of this false christianity that seems right but is not. They adopting many things that we do in our worship of God and this is the scenario of the wheat and the tares that Mathew 13 gives.

That is all I can share now it is 2200 here in SA and it is time for bed. Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to share my thoughts on the subject too, not only for my benefit but for the benefit of all that read it

 

[Dario]

It really is not about religion. It is about the truth in God, Jesus Christ, our savior. Religion is a man made word. The truth is not a religion

 

[rojoloco]

Catholic means Uni-versal. Why is that so threatening?

Actually, there is a lot that can be threatening about it. For instance, Universalists deny John 14:6 because they claim all will go to Heaven because God doesn't want anybody to go to Hell.

Specifically regarding this thread, universal is being used as an exclusive term and not inclusively as the name implies. Originally, the universal church was believers of every race, creed, and color under Jesus Christ. Now, it is simply the Roman Catholic Church and it is very exclusive. You are either one of them or you are a heretic. Of course, if it means standing up for the 5 solas of the Reformation and the doctrines of grace, brand me a heretic all you want. lol

My point is that the term "universal" does not always imply good but can easily carry a negative connotation.

 

[jiggyfly]

Actually, there is a lot that can be threatening about it. For instance, Universalists deny John 14:6 because they claim all will go to Heaven because God doesn't want anybody to go to Hell.

Which universalism group are your referring to?

 

[iamamazed]

I think this sums it all up as an answer to this thread.




Ecclesiastes 12

<sup class="versenum" id="en-KJV-17536">12</sup>And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh. <sup class="versenum" id="en-KJV-17537">13</sup>Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
<sup class="versenum" id="en-KJV-17538">14</sup>For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

 

[SpiritLedEd]

I think this sums it all up as an answer to this thread.




Ecclesiastes 12

<sup class="versenum" id="en-KJV-17536">12</sup>And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh. <sup class="versenum" id="en-KJV-17537">13</sup>Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
<sup class="versenum" id="en-KJV-17538">14</sup>For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

I agree and after twenty-two pages of discussion, it seems to me that everything that can be said has been said, so I'm closing the thread.

SLE