The Eucharist

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Ask Jesus : One Thread

"Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:54)

What does it mean?

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 05, 2003

Answers

EXACTLY what John 6:63 states. Christians are NOT cannibals!!! Catholics do ERR in their interpretation of this verse.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 05, 2003.

Kevin now you are hiding.

You still have not answered to this verse and you probably will not.

Must I keep hunting you down for an answer? Or, you should simply admit it, you can't answer and refuse to answer. I'll accept that, too.

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 05, 2003.


rod,

You claim that I am hiding, when this is NOT the case. I told you that the verse I provided answered your question. If NOT, then please tell everyone here WHY NOT???

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 05, 2003.


Your answer demands an interpretation from me. This would mean that I would be answering my own question.

Let me give you my answer, Kevin.

The Jews were the ones who came to eat bread, which Jesus was offering. The mentality of these visiting Jesus centered on food, not spiritual food. Then, Jesus began to offer them the spiritual food needed for enternal life. The Jews were pretty much confused as to what Jesus was talking about. The Jews, afterall, were after food for their flesh, not food for their souls.

Jesus reminded them of the Manna given to them not by Moses, but given to them by God from Heaven. And now, God was giving them the bread from Heaven-the Saviour. The Jews still did not understand and could not make the connection.

I think that the Scriptures in John 6:54 could be interpreted as a reflection of how the Jews were thinking. What the Jews could understand was that the only way to accept Christ would be by actually eating him. This was the only way that they would accept Christ. This was the only thing they could understand, because the concept of eternal life was inconceivable as being a spiritual life. They took it to mean an eternal life here on earth as never dying of the flesh. The Jews, confused, walk away.

It would seem that Jesus used a sarcastic remark in order to reflect how the Jews interpreted His words. But, I think there is still more.

If it is true that we see the presence of God in many thing and beings, it is true that God and Jesus are one (add the Holy Spirit). If we see the presence of God in all that He created, we can see God in the flowers, oceans, sky, and people. Why then is it impossible to experience the presence of God, Jesus, in the Holy Eucharist? Even if it is a symbolic gesture or celebration, why is it not possible to experience the presence of the "Host" in the Eucharist? Why can the Pentecostals claim to have the Holy Spirit enter them yet not understand the Eucharist

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 05, 2003.


rod,

Thank you for answering my question.

You wrote, "The Jews were the ones who came to eat bread, which Jesus was offering. The mentality of these visiting Jesus centered on food, not spiritual food."

Please explain How "the Jews were the ones who came to eat bread, which Jesus was offering"??? How can you state that "The mentality of these visiting Jesus centered on food, not spiritual food"??? This is your interpretation of John 6:54 and the Jews did NOT walk with Jesus to eat PHYSICAL food, if this is the case, please do show me where God specifically stated this in His word.

You wrote, "Then, Jesus began to offer them the spiritual food needed for enternal life. The Jews were pretty much confused as to what Jesus was talking about. The Jews, afterall, were after food for their flesh, not food for their souls. Jesus reminded them of the Manna given to them not by Moses, but given to them by God from Heaven. And now, God was giving them the bread from Heaven-the Saviour. The Jews still did not understand and could not make the connection. I think that the Scriptures in John 6:54 could be interpreted as a reflection of how the Jews were thinking. What the Jews could understand was that the only way to accept Christ would be by actually eating him. This was the only way that they would accept Christ. This was the only thing they could understand, because the concept of eternal life was inconceivable as being a spiritual life. They took it to mean an eternal life here on earth as never dying of the flesh. The Jews, confused, walk away. It would seem that Jesus used a sarcastic remark in order to reflect how the Jews interpreted His words. But, I think there is still more. If it is true that we see the presence of God in many thing and beings, it is true that God and Jesus are one (add the Holy Spirit)."

My reply: Yes, the Jews did NOT understand for they thought that he was LITERALLY speaking of EATING HIS FLESH and DRINKING HIS BLOOD, but this is NOT what He meant for He EXPLAINED how this was NOT the case in John 6:63 when He said, "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life." Jesus knew that there would be many who would NOT BELIEVE in Him that is why He said in John 6:64, "But there are some of you who do not believe." After Jesus made the following statement in John 6:65, "And He said, "Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father."

Verse 66 states, "From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more." They walked with Him NO MORE because they did NOT BELIEVE and this had absoulutely NOTHING to do with PHYSICAL FOOD.

You wrote, "If we see the presence of God in all that He created, we can see God in the flowers, oceans, sky, and people. Why then is it impossible to experience the presence of God, Jesus, in the Holy Eucharist? Even if it is a symbolic gesture or celebration, why is it not possible to experience the presence of the "Host" in the Eucharist? Why can the Pentecostals claim to have the Holy Spirit enter them yet not understand the Eucharist?

My reply: Because there is NO Physical presence in what you call the Eucharist. (The word of God calls it the Lord's Supper.) Pentecostals do NOT have the Holy Spirit, for that is all they do is make FALSE CLAIMS that they have the Holy Spirit.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 05, 2003.



Kevin stick with the verse that we are trying to figure out, John 6:54. What did Jesus mean by this verse? Why did He say this?

Don't give me the other verses. I want to know what this verse (John 6:54) means. I want to get the full meaning of this one verse because various denominations have built their doctrine on it.

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 05, 2003.


rod,

In John 6:63 Jesus EXPLAINED what He meant in John 6:54. Jesus did NOT mean to LITERALLY drink His blood for then He would be guilty of making people CANNIBALS for it is a sin to drink blood for God specifically said in Deut 12:23-26 that the Israelites were NOT to eat the blood, for the blood is the life. We are also COMMANDED in the NT NOT to drink blood for the Gentiles were admonished in Acts 15:29 to ABSTAIN from blood.

If we (Gentiles) are COMMANDED to ABSTAIN from blood (and we are), then why would Jesus COMMAND us to drink His blood?

This makes absolutely NO sense at all now does it??? Do you now understand how the Catholics do ERR in their interpretation of this passage of Scripture?

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 05, 2003.


Kevin, you still have not answered my question, so I'll ask it again.

John 6:54. What did Jesus mean by this verse? Why did He say this? Don't give me the other verses. I want to know what this verse (John 6:54) means. I want to get the full meaning of this one verse because various denominations have built their doctrine on it.

I Jesus does not mean "cannibalism", than why does He say to eat his body and blood?

And, stop impying that I am Catholic and simply answer the question.

rod..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 05, 2003.


rod,

I answered your question in my last post. If you do NOT see it, then I am sorry for that is the ONLY answer you are going to get from me. If you CANNOT see that I have answered your question, then you are BLIND and this PROVES that you do NOT even bother to read what I have written.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 05, 2003.


You have proven your predetermined assesment of my actions once again, Kevin. I have read all of your comments and links. Once again:

Please don't back me up in a gunfight unless you are sure your gun is loaded and you are not aiming at me, please.

I can see that you cannot answer my question. The Catholic Church does answer it and celebrates it every time and for its very purpose--mass.

Now, with this answer you will most likely begin to call me a Catholic. But, I'm not sure that the Catholics would call me "Catholic".

It puzzles me how somethings you take literally and some figuratively. It is strange how some Scriptures are intended in a literal sense and others not, yet doctrines inter-change the meanings to fit their doctrines.

rod..
-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 05, 2003.



rod, the flesh(bread) is his Word, the blood(wine) is the Blood he shed for us on the Cross. There is no real presense, it's only symbolic. When we take the bible literal, we mean that we only stick to what's written, using grammer to find out if something is figurative or poetic or etc.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 05, 2003.

I feel that I have the symbolic understanding and can even give you some insights to further meanings. But, I find need more understanding of "transubstantiation" or the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. I must have full understanding of John 6:54. And, not even the Catholic belief can give me a definate answer. The ultimate solution is faith.

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 05, 2003.


rod,

I tried to show you how the verse in question could NOT be LITERAL because the eating of blood was condemned in the OT and the NT. If this is the case, then why would Jesus state that we are to LITERALLY drink His blood if it is something that is CONDEMNED??? You have to look at the context to see whether a passage is LITERAL or FIGURATIVE in meaning. And this passage in question MOST CERTAINLY has a figurative meaning.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 05, 2003.


Oh, Kevin, what a genius you are! Where were you when Justin Martyr said this:

"For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour,having been made flesh and blood for our salvation,so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word,and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished,is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." Justin Martyr,First Apology,66(A.D. 110-165),in ANF,I:185

OR, when Iraneus said this:

"He acknowledged the cup (which is a part of the creation) as his own blood,from which he bedews our blood; and the bread (also a part of creation) he affirmed to be his own body,from which he gives increase to our bodies." Irenaeus,Against Heresies,V:2,2(c.A.D. 200),in NE,119

OR when Tertullian said this:

"Then, having taken the bread and given it to His disciples, He made it His own body, by saying, 'This is my body,' that is, the figure of my body. A figure, however, there could not have been, unless there were first a veritable body. An empty thing, or phantom, is incapable of a figure. If, however, (as Marcion might say,) He pretended the bread was His body, because He lacked the truth of bodily substance, it follows that He must have given bread for us. It would contribute very well to the support of Marcion's theory of a phantom body, that bread should have been crucified! But why call His body bread, and not rather (some other edible thing, say) a melon, which Marcion must have had in lieu of a heart! He did not understand how ancient was this figure of the body of Christ, who said Himself by Jeremiah: 'I was like a lamb or an ox that is brought to the slaughter, and I knew not that they devised a device against me, saying, Let us cast the tree upon His bread,' which means, of course, the cross upon His body. And thus, casting light, as He always did, upon the ancient prophecies, He declared plainly enough what He meant by the bread, when He called the bread His own body. He likewise, when mentioning the cup and making the new testament to be sealed 'in His blood,' affirms the reality of His body. For no blood can belong to a body which is not a body of flesh. If any sort of body were presented to our view, which is not one of flesh, not being fleshly, it would not possess blood. Thus, from the evidence of the flesh, we get a proof of the body, and a proof of the flesh from the evidence of the blood. In order, however, that you may discover how anciently wine is used as a figure for blood, turn to Isaiah, who asks, 'Who is this that cometh from Edom, from Bosor with garments dyed in red, so glorious in His apparel, in the greatness of his might? Why are thy garments red, and thy raiment as his who cometh from the treading of the full winepress?' The prophetic Spirit contemplates the Lord as if He were already on His way to His passion, clad in His fleshly nature; and as He was to suffer therein, He represents the bleeding condition of His flesh under the metaphor of garments dyed in red, as if reddened in the treading and crushing process of the wine-press, from which the labourers descend reddened with the wine-juice, like men stained in blood. Much more clearly still does the book of Genesis foretell this, when (in the blessing of Judah, out of whose tribe Christ was to come according to the flesh) it even then delineated Christ in the person of that patriarch, saying, 'He washed His garments in wine, and His clothes in the blood of grapes'--in His garments and clothes the prophecy pointed out his flesh, and His blood in the wine. Thus did He now consecrate His blood in wine, who then (by the patriarch) used the figure of wine to describe His blood." Tertullian,Against Marcion,40(A.D. 212),in ANF,III:418-419

OR when Cyril said this:

"He once in Cana of Galilee, turned the water into wine, akin to blood, and is it incredible that He should have turned wine into blood?" Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,XXII:4(c.A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:152

"Having learn these things, and been fully assured that the seeming bread is not bread, though sensible to taste, but the Body of Christ; and that the seeming wine is not wine, though the taste will have it so, but the Blood of Christ; and that of this David sung of old, saying, And bread strengtheneth man's heart, to make his face to shine with oil, 'strengthen thou thine heart,' by partaking thereof as spiritual, and "make the face of thy soul to shine." " Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,XXII:8(c.A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:152

"Then having sanctified ourselves by these spiritual Hymns, we beseech the merciful God to send forth His Holy Spirit upon the gifts lying before Him; that He may make the Bread the Body of Christ, and the Wine the Blood of Christ; for whatsoever the Holy Ghost has touched, is surely sanctified and changed." Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,XXIII:7(c.A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:154

AND THE LIST GOES ON AN ON . . . .

"Let us then in everything believe God, and gainsay Him in nothing, though what is said seem to be contrary to our thoughts and senses, but let His word be of higher authority than both reasonings and sight. Thus let us do in the mysteries also, not looking at the things set before us, but keeping in mind His sayings. For His word cannot deceive, but our senses are easily beguiled. That hath never failed, but this in most things goeth wrong. Since then the word saith, 'This is my body,' let us both be persuaded and believe, and look at it with the eyes of the mind. For Christ hath given nothing sensible, but though in things sensible yet all to be perceived by the mind. So also in baptism, the gift is bestowed by a sensible thing, that is, by water; but that which is done is perceived by the mind, the birth, I mean, and the renewal. For if thou hadst been incorporeal, He would have delivered thee the incorporeal gifts bare; but because the soul hath been locked up in a body, He delivers thee the things that the mind perceives, in things sensible. How many now say, I would wish to see His form, the mark, His clothes, His shoes. Lo! thou seest Him, Thou touchest Him, thou eatest Him. And thou indeed desirest to see His clothes, but He giveth Himself to thee not to see only, but also to touch and eat and receive within thee." John Chrysostom,Gospel of Matthew,Homily 82(A.D. 370),in NPNF1,X:495

"You will see the Levites bringing the loaves and a cup of wine, and placing them on the table. So long as the prayers and invocations have not yet been made,it is mere bread and a mere cup. But when the great and wonderous prayers have been recited, then the bread becomes the body and the cup the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ....When the great prayers and holy supplications are sent up, the Word descends on the bread and the cup, and it becomes His body." Athanasius,Sermon to the Newly Baptized,PG 26,1325(ante A.D. 373),in ECD,442

"If the subsistence of every body depends on nourishment, and this is eating and drinking, and in the case of our eating there is bread and in the case of our drinking water sweetened with wine, and if, as was explained at the beginning, the Word of God, Who is both God and the Word, coalesced with man's nature, and when He came in a body such as ours did not innovate on man's physical constitution so as to make it other than it was, but secured continuance for His own body by the customary and proper means, and controlled its subsistence by meat and drink, the former of which was bread,--just, then, as in the case of ourselves, as has been repeatedly said already, if a person sees bread he also, in a kind of way, looks on a human body, for by the bread being within it the bread becomes it, so also, in that other case, the body into which God entered, by partaking of the nourishment of bread, was, in a certain measure, the same with it; that nourishment, as we have said, changing itself into the nature of the body. For that which is peculiar to all flesh is acknowledged also in the case of that flesh, namely, that that Body too was maintained by bread; which Body also by the indwelling of God the Word was transmuted to the dignity of Godhead. Rightly, then, do we believe that now also the bread which is consecrated by the Word of God is changed into the Body of God the Word. For that Body was once, by implication, bread, but has been consecrated by the inhabitation of the Word that tabernacled in the flesh. Therefore, from the same cause as that by which the bread that was transformed in that Body was changed to a Divine potency, a similar result takes place now. For as in that case, too, the grace of the Word used to make holy the Body, the substance of which came of the bread, and in a manner was itself bread, so also in this case the bread, as says the Apostle, 'is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer'; not that it advances by the process of eating to the stage of passing into the body of the Word, but it is at once changed into the body by means of the Word, as the Word itself said, 'This is My Body.' Seeing, too, that all flesh is nourished by what is moist(for without this combination our earthly part would not continue to live), just as we support by food which is firm and solid the solid part of our body, in like manner we supplement the moist part from the kindred element; and this, when within us, by its faculty of being transmitted, is changed to blood, and especially if through the wine it receives the faculty of being transmuted into heat. Since, then, that God- containing flesh partook for its substance and support of this particular nourishment also, and since the God who was manifested infused Himself into perishable humanity for this purpose, viz. that by this communion with Deity mankind might at the same time be deified, for this end it is that, by dispensation of His grace, He disseminates Himself in every believer through that flesh, whose substance comes from bread and wine, blending Himself with the bodies of believers, to secure that, by this union with the immortal, man, too, may be a sharer in incorruption. He gives these gifts by virtue of the benediction through which He transelements the natural quality of these visible things to that immortal thing." Gregory of Nyssa,The Great Catechism,37(post A.D. 383),in NPNF2,V:505- 506

"Then He added: 'For My Flesh is meat indeed, and My Blood is drink [indeed].' Thou hearest Him speak of His Flesh and of His Blood, thou perceivest the sacred pledges, [conveying to us the merits and power] of the Lord's death, and thou dishonourest His Godhead. Hear His own words: 'A spirit hath not flesh and bones.' Now we, as often as we receive the Sacramental Elements, which by the mysterous efficacy of holy prayer are transformed into the Flesh and the Blood, "do show the Lord's Death.'" Ambrose,On the Christian Faith,4,10:125(A.D. 380),in NPNF2,X:278

"Perhaps you will say, 'I see something else, how is it that you assert that I receive the Body of Christ?' And this is the point which remains for us to prove. And what evidence shall we make use of? Let us prove that this is not what nature made, but what the blessing consecrated, and the power of blessing is greater than that of nature, because by blessing nature itself is changed...The Lord Jesus Himself proclaims: 'This is My Body.' Before the blessing of the heavenly words another nature is spoken of, after the consecration the Body is signified. He Himself speaks of His Blood. Before the consecration it has another name, after it is called Blood. And you say, Amen, that is, It is true. Let the heart within confess what the mouth utters, let the soul feel what the voice speaks." Ambrose,On the Mysteries,9:50(A.D. 390-391),in NPNF2,X:324-325

" 'And was carried in His Own Hands:' how 'carried in His Own Hands'? Because when He commended His Own Body and Blood, He took into His Hands that which the faithful know; and in a manner carried Himself, when He said, 'This is My Body.' " Augustine,On the Psalms,33:1,10(A.D. 392-418),in NPNF1,VIII:73

"He did not say,'This is the symbol of My Body, and this, of My Blood,' but, what is set before us, but that it is transformed by means of the Eucharistic action into Flesh and Blood." Theodore of Mopsuestia,Commentary on Matthew 26:26(ante A.D. 428),in JUR,II:81

"Eran.--You have opportunely introduced the subject of the divine mysteries for from it I shall be able to show you the change of the Lord's body into another nature. Answer now to my questions. Orth.--I will answer. Eran.--What do you call the gift which is offered before the priestly invocation? Orth.--It were wrong to say openly; perhaps some uninitiated are present. Eran.--Let your answer be put enigmatically. Orth.--Food of grain of such a sort. Eran.--And how name we the other symbol? Orth.--This name too is common, signifying species of drink. Eran.--And after the consecration how do you name these? Orth.--Christ's body and Christ's blood. Eran.--And do yon believe that you partake of Christ's body and blood? Orth.--I do." Theodoret of Cyrus,Eranistes,2(A.D. 451),in NPNF1,III:200

"Dearly-beloved, utter this confession with all your heart and reject the wicked lies of heretics, that your fasting and almsgiving may not be polluted by any contagion with error: for then is our offering of the sacrifice clean and oar gifts of mercy holy, when those who perform them understand that which they do. For when the Lord says, "unless ye have eaten the flesh of the Son of Man, and drunk His blood, ye will not have life in you,' you ought so to be partakers at the Holy Table, as to have no doubt whatever concerning the reality of Christ's Body and Blood. For that is taken in the mouth which is believed in Faith, and it is vain for them to respond Amend who dispute that which is taken." Pope Leo the Great,Sermon, 91:3(ante A.D. 461),NPNF2,XII:202

"The body which is born of the holy Virgin is in truth body united with divinity, not that the body which was received up into the heavens descends, but that the bread itself and the wine are changed into God's body and blood. But if you enquire how this happens, it is enough for you to learn that it was through the Holy Spirit, just as the Lord took on Himself flesh that subsisted in Him and was born of the holy Mother of God through the Spirit. And we know nothing further save that the Word of God is true and energises and is omnipotent, but the manner of this cannot be searched out. But one can put it well thus, that just as in nature the bread by the eating and the wine and the water by the drinking are changed into the body and blood of the eater and drinker, and do not become a different body from the former one, so the bread of the table and the wine and water are supernaturally changed by the invocation and presence of the Holy Spirit into the body and blood of Christ, and are not two but one and the same. Wherefore to those who partake worthily with faith, it is for the remission of sins and for life everlasting and for the safeguarding of soul and body; but to those who partake unworthily without faith, it is for chastisement and punishment, just as also the death of the Lord became to those who believe life and incorruption for the enjoyment of eternal blessedness, while to those who do not believe and to the murderers of the Lord it is for everlasting chastisement and punishment. The bread and the wine are not merely figures of the body and blood of Christ (God forbid!) but the deified body of the Lord itself: for the Lord has said, 'This is My body,' not, this is a figure of My body: and 'My blood,' not, a figure of My blood. And on a previous occasion He had said to the Jews, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, ye have no life in you. For My flesh is meat indeed and My blood is drink indeed. And again, He that eateth Me, shall live." John of Damascus,Exposition of the Orthodox Faith,4:13(A.D. 743),in NPNF2,IX:83

You set yourself up with a good group, Kevin, those who DISBELIEVED in the gospel of John; those who RAN AWAY, and of whom Christ sadly and INTERESTINGLY did not go after!

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), August 05, 2003.


You are excellent, Gail! Thanks.

rod..

..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 05, 2003.



Gail,

Your cut and paste church history does NOT prove that the Catholic postion on this verse is correct!! It does NOT make any difference what these so-called church fathers have said, what matters is what God has said in His word!!! Why do you have to run to sources outside of the word of God to try and prove a point, especially when they disagreed with themselves over many different doctrines???

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 06, 2003.


Where were you Gail when Jesus said this: "Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:54).

And explained Himself when He said this: "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life." (John 6:63).

Hmmmmmmmmm??????

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 06, 2003.


Sorry if I seem to be returning to my 'old self' again. But it angers me at how people can believe such a thing. Oral tradition cannot be proven without a tape recorder, Gail have you ever tried that telephone thing? Get about 30 people, number them 1-30 and have #1 call #2 telling him a story, and then #2 calls #3 and so on. You will see how much the story has changed from #1 to #30. That is why God left us his Perfect Word, dictated by the Holy Spirit himself. Jesus turned to the written scriptures to resist the Devil, The Bereans checked the scriptures to see if Paul was telling the truth. Never did they go to oral tradition. If you show me a tape recording of your oral tradition coming from an apostle I will convert to Catholicism. But you can't, even if there was a tape recording, how could we know it was Paul or Peter?

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 06, 2003.

David,

Why shouldn't it matter what our forefathers in the faith believed about scripture? Why isn't their interpretation important? Some of these leaders sat directly under the teaching of the Apostles, and have left their commentative writings (letters mostly) to be read by all. They had the actual letters of the apostles in their hands. And they preached from those letters to the churches under their charge. How can they not matter? These men were almost ALL martyred for their faith. Why should not their teachings not carry SUBSTANTIAL weight in our minds?

Why should I put any stock in what you think, or what Kevin thinks, or what the Assembly of God thinks. You and Kevin are NOT both right, David, and yet each of you think "you've got the truth." Two opposites DO NOT UNITE under the banner of truth.

What gives Assembly of God the authority to teach there is a possibility of losing own's salvation? What gives Baptists the authority to teach the opposite, that you CANNOT lose your salvation? This is an important issue, don't you think? And yet here are two different denominations each claiming to have the truth, and basing their truth on the scripture. Each can gather scriptures to support their claim, so who has the authority to say "their's is the right way"??

I have asked a lot of questions here, I realize, but they are important questions. I asked myself these questions for TWO YEARS. It all boils down to "authority." Who has it? Where did they get it? And from Whom did they get it?

Gail

P.S. When I began reading the writings of Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement, etc., who were all 1st to 2nd generation Christians, my first thought was "Man, these guys were serious about their faith." My second thought, TO MY COMPLETE SHOCK AND HORROR was "THESE GUYS ARE CATHOLIC." I am reading about purgatory, the Eucharist, Mary, the Mother of God, etc. etc. How can this be?

If you tell me these folk were all apostate because you see that they are Catholic, then that means the church Christ founded and instituted at Pentecost IMMEDIATELY WENT BELLY UP, and that all these martyrs, those fed to lions were APOSTATE!!! I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT, DAVID! That is impossible!

If you DO believe the church went belly-up immediately, then you HAVE to believe the church was not really born until the Reformation. BUT The fruit of the Reformation is division, and no kingdom divided against itself shall stand. The divisions in Protestantism are clear breaches of the teachings in scripture.

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), August 06, 2003.


"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from THE SIMPLICITY that is in Christ." 2 Corinthians 11:3

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 06, 2003.

The bible is the ultimate authority. You are right, it all boils down to authority. Who has it? A fallible man or the perfect Word of God?

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 07, 2003.

David,

You are incorrect, it is Jesus that has all authority. (Matthew 28:18).

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 07, 2003.


Gail would rather bow down to an infallible man (the pope) instead of an infallible God.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 07, 2003.

Ok now you confused me. Yes Jesus is the ultimate authority, so where does that leave the bible? I think I should of said the bible is the final authority for matters of doctrine.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 07, 2003.

Yes David, the word of God is our authority for doctrine.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 07, 2003.

Yes, but it takes a man to read it and interpret it. So, who are you going to allow to teach you the meanings of the Bible, Benny Hinn?

rod..

..

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 07, 2003.


No rod, I am responsible for interpreting the Bible, NOT Benny Hinn, NOT the Pope, NOT some church evangelist, I am the one responsible since it is MY soul that is at stake.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 07, 2003.

And Kevin, I am sure that you are living up to your conscience and living in accordance with the light you have been given in your interpretation of scripture AS ARE ROD AND I!!!

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), August 07, 2003.


That would be something. A room full of self-proclaimed theologians preaching to each other would be like watching a hockey game of players with each their own set of rules--a riot!

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 07, 2003.


Gail,

You wrote, "And Kevin, I am sure that you are living up to your conscience and living in accordance with the light you have been given in your interpretation of scripture AS ARE ROD AND I!!!"

No, I am not living up to my conscience, I live in accordance with what God has stated in His word. Saul lived in all good conscience when he was persecuting the Christians, so conscience cannot be a safe guide in religon for one can be sincere and be sincerly wrong. The Catholic Church teaches many false doctrine and you have been deceived into believing that they are the truth. Catholics have many doctrines that cannot be proven by the word of God and that is because they have gone beyond God's word and have been turned aside to fables.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 07, 2003.


Kevin, you said "No rod, I am responsible for interpreting the Bible, NOT Benny Hinn, NOT the Pope, NOT some church evangelist, I am the one responsible since it is MY soul that is at stake."

Like you, I AM RESPONSIBLE! I believe Christ instituted a Church, from scripture. I believe Peter was the head hauncho, again from scripture. I believe Christ gave that Church authority, again from scripture. I believe when Christ prayed the High Priestly prayer, that it has been answered. I believe the Biblical rule of faith is both scripture AND tradition, again from scripture. I positively do not believe in the notion of sola scriptura -- again FROM SCRIPTURE.

So where does that point me? One direction . . .the Church Christ instituted. I would have to deny everything I believe to leave that Church.

My question to you is, "Why is your interpretation of scripture better than mine?"

Gail

P.S. "The Bible makes me do it."

gAIL

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), August 08, 2003.


"I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved." (John 10:9).

That's it, I am going to start a movement of "The Real presence of Jesus in doors".

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), August 08, 2003.


Gail,

You wrote, "Like you, I AM RESPONSIBLE! I believe Christ instituted a Church, from scripture. I believe Peter was the head hauncho, again from scripture. I believe Christ gave that Church authority, again from scripture. I believe when Christ prayed the High Priestly prayer, that it has been answered. I believe the Biblical rule of faith is both scripture AND tradition, again from scripture. I positively do not believe in the notion of sola scriptura -- again FROM SCRIPTURE."

No Gail, the difference between you and I are that you are TOLD what you are to believe and what scripture says. You CANNOT have an interpretation that does NOT agree with the Catholic Church, even if their interpretation does NOT agree with the word of God. The word of God does NOT say that Peter was first among the apostles for in this, the Catholic Church does err, not teaching the truth. Jesus did NOT give His church authority to continue to have authority, for His authority was given to the apostles ONLY to confirm the word. The church of today ONLY has the authority to PROCLAIM God's word, and NOT to legislate truth, for all of that has already been accomplished since we now have the completed word of God written down for us in the NT. There is NO mention that tradition would continue to be handed down, if that is the case, there would be no need to have the written word. Catholics do NOT need the written word of God anyway, especially since they are told what to believe. Faith comes from God's word, NOT from the church. Jesus did NOT institute the Catholic Church, for this Church does NOT have any basis in the truth of God's word and is to be rejected.

You wrote, "My question to you is, "Why is your interpretation of scripture better than mine?"

Because my interpretation AGREES with the word of God. I do NOT have to CHANGE God's word to AGREE with my interpretation.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), August 11, 2003.


Kevin,

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH PRODUCED THE HOLY BIBLE AND NOT VICE VERSA

The doctrine of Sola Scriptura overlooks ~ or at least grossly underemphasizes ~ the fact that the Catholic Church came before the Bible, and not the other way around. It was the Catholic Church, in effect, which wrote the Holy Bible under the inspiration of Almighty God: the Israelites as the Old Testament Church (or "pre-Catholics") and the early Catholics as the New Testament Church.

THE CANON OF THE BIBLE WAS NOT SETTLED UNTIL THE FOURTH CENTURY

It was not until the Catholic Synod of Rome, 382 A.D., and the Catholic Councils of Hippo, 393 A.D. and Carthage, 397.AD., that we find a definitive list of canonical books being drawn up, and each of these Catholic Councils acknowledged the very same list of books. From this point on, there is in practice no dispute about the canon of the Bible, the only exception being the so-called Protestant Reformers, who entered the scene in 1517 A.D., and unbelievable 11 centuries later.

~ from 21 Reasons to Reject Sola Scriptura by Joel Peters

So in other words, Kevin, The Catholic Church has Authority over the Holy Bible: in its assembly, interpretation, and application. The Magisterium (the Teaching Authority of the Catholic Church) has the Correct interpretation of the Bible that is why there is only One Catholic Church.

Because the Protestant Church is so divided in its interpretation of the Bible, as of 1996, there are 35,000 Protestant denominations. You sound like you will be an added Protestant denomination unto your own with your private biblical interpretation "expertise."

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 10, 2003.


James?

Do you know of any other church, denomination, religion, or whatever that is bigger than the Catholic Church?

I'm not asking for a fight. I'm asking for a clear view and understanding of the claims you've made. If there is a bigger church out there, of what threat would such a religion have on Catholicism?

rod..

..


-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 10, 2003.


James,

You wrote, "THE CATHOLIC CHURCH PRODUCED THE HOLY BIBLE AND NOT VICE VERSA"

Really??? I say PROVE IT!!! In your reply, please give Book, Chapter and Verse which states that the Church produced the Bible.

There is NO mention in the Bible of the word CATHOLIC much less the Catholic Church and I challenge you to prove otherwise.

Words are vehicles of thought. In the Bible, God's will is revealed to men. In Catholic literature we obtain the teaching and practice of the Catholic Church. In this literature, we find frequent reference to these terms: Rosary, Penance, Indulgences, Eucharist, Purgatory, etc., but NONE of these terms are in the Bible! NO, NOT ONE.

WHY IS THAT? You draw your own conclusion!

The Catholic version of Romans 6:4 states, "For we are buried with him by means of baptism into death." But the Catholic Church officially accepts sprinkling for baptism. If they had produced the Bible, why would not they have arranged for this practice in the text?

The answer is they did NOT produce the Bible!

It is NOT their book!

The teaching of the New Testament will make Christians, members of the church of our Lord, the church of Christ!

It takes something else, expressed by a completely different vocabulary to produce Roman Catholics!

No one doctrine peculiar to the Church of Rome can be found in the Bible!

THE ONLY CORRECT conclusion is that the Bible IS NOT a Catholic Book!

James, it is NOT the church that produced the Bible, but the Bible that produced the church!!!!

The SEED is the Word of God. (Luke 8:11) Not the church.

The implanted Word is able to SAVE OUR SOULS. (James 1:21) Not the church.

The Gospel is the POWER of God for salvation. (Romans 1:16) Not the church.

The apostle Peter said that we are born again THROUGH the Word of God. (1 Peter 1:23) Not the church.

We will be judged by what is WRITTEN. (Revelation 20:12) Not by the church.

The Word of God does an effective job in cutting down the Catholic Church (2 Cor. 10:4-5) and their doctrines are defeated by the very book that they claim to have given the world to follow.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 10, 2003.


Kevin, Did you know that the original Protestant King James Version of the Holy Bible, first published in 1611 A.D., contained the books of Tobit, Judith, 1st and 2nd Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch? Look in your Protestant bible Table of Contents ... chances are you are missing those books. You are being deprived of 7 books! (better to be deprived of food than 7 books of the Word of God). And I tell you, great wisdom exists in those books! I especially like the books of Wisdom and Sirach. Those 7 books were contained in the canonical books listed by the Catholic Synod of Rome in 382 A.D., as I have mentioned earlier. The American version of the Protestant King James Bible progressively (or should I say, regressively) eliminated the publication of those books because it was cheaper to publish a bible with less books. Subsequently, all the other protestant versions of the bible followed suit and contained the incomplete list. The Catholic Bible, however, being the first bible for all of Christendom, has always contained the complete amount of books. Luther (the excommunicated priest who married a nun and established his new church called the Lutheran church) hated the book of James and tried to remove it from the canon; thank God he was unsuccessful (to your benefit).

Yes, Kevin, whether you like it or not, the Catholic Church, through the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit, determined which books should be contained in the Holy Bible. Many books were not included because they were not sufficiently or completely Divinely inspired; for instance the book of Thomas was excluded and even the so called Gospel of Peter the Head of the Apostle was excluded.

1 Timothy 3:15 calls The Church (the Catholic Church), and Not the Bible, as the "Pillar and Foundation of Truth." The first christians did not have the Holy Bible (because it was not written yet), they had to rely on those in Authority (Peter & the apostles) as well as the Tradition of the Holy Apostles. This is not to diminish the importance of the Holy Bible, but The Church (the Catholic Church) has Authority over the Holy Bible in its assembly and proper interpretation (which is difficult, I'm sure you will agree).

Now, may I suggest for you to go to a Catholic bookstore and treat yourself to a Complete bible ~ to the delight of your soul. I admire your zeal but the Holy Bible said that zeal without knowledge is worthless(Proverbs 19:2). I hope that someday soon you will become a Catholic ~ we need people with zeal like yours.

Rod, Paganism was bigger than Christianity during the first centuries of Christianity. Pagan Rome persecuted the early christians and created many martyrs, the blood of whom were seeds for the growth of Christianity. Pagan Rome was a threat, indeed, but Christianity grew anyways because of God's Divine Plan. Today, out of the 6.3 Billion world population, only 1/6th are Roman Catholics. Maybe you should contact your local Catholic Church and inquire about the R.C.I.A. program ~ your soul will be a welcome addition to the Roman Catholic population. You will experience the joy of eating the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ present in the Holy Eucharist in the accident of wheat bread ~ the most intimate personal relationship with Jesus Christ one can have on earth.

Peace be with both of you.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 10, 2003.


Hi James.

You will be surprised with many of the things I've written in this forum and the Catholic forum.

BTW, I was baptized in the Catholic Church and received the Holy Eucharist. My family tree has its roots deeply imbedded in Catholicism. I'm afraid that the Catholic Church may not accept me back until certain issues are cleared up in my life. You could say that my "limbo" has already made its presence to me.

p.s. You will find a thread I've posted listing all of the "real" apocryphal books the Church rejected. I hope that Kevin and David have had a chance to look over that list and perhaps even browsed thru some of those books.

rod...



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 10, 2003.


Here are some discussions on a related topic of "Apocrypha" and Church:

forum link 1
forum link 2

rod..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 10, 2003.


Hi Rod, I read the links you mentioned ... I like your witty humor. I think most cradle Catholics are unaware of the incredible Grace God has given them by letting them be born as Catholics from Catholic families out of all of history and out of all of humanity. Just recollect the spiritual Grace of the Holy Sacraments blessed upon cradle Catholics throughout their childhood, the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary for them since birth, the intercession of St. Joseph and all the Saints, Catholic education which is the best in the world, the influence of the Tradition of the Holy Apostles, the infusion of Truth since birth, etc.

I've also had my share of "limbo." As God said, "Seek and you will find." Just be careful of the sharks out there.

I think you will benefit greatly from spiritual direction from a holy, competent, wise priest willing to catechise you on a regular basis, say an hour a week until most of your doubts are answered. Father McCloskey catechised a renowned abortionist, who had killed an ignoble amount of babies (in the thousands), on a regular basis and assisted him in his conversion to the one true church of Jesus Christ and St. Peter and the holy apostles, the Catholic Church. This spiritual direction is something worthy you have to Seek (and it's free, of course, courtesy of the Catholic Church).

God accepts us as we are (zits and all): go to confession, don't think about it, just go. God's MERCY is waiting for you! God longs to be reconciled with you more than you long to be reconciled with Him.

Persevere to go to Daily Mass and your spirit, mind, and heart will be sanctified daily.

For me, this is the clincher: kneel before the Holy Eucharist (Jesus Himself, face to face) in Eucharistic Adoration (30 min to an hour each time, as often as you can), and tell Him all your doubts, and ask Him to reveal to you the Truth.

If you havn't read yet the Second Edition (1997) of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, then it is time for you to do so; this book is just phenomenal.

I will certainly include you in my daily prayers.

Peace be with you.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 11, 2003.


Thanks, James.

Your words have touched on those specifics I've been struggling with.

rod..

..

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 11, 2003.


Rod, You're welcome. Thanks be to God.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 11, 2003.

"I hope that Kevin and David have had a chance to look over that list and perhaps even browsed thru some of those books."

rod,

Reading those books will not change my mind. I still don't think Old Testament has some authority in some areas...and I certainly will not believe in books that their very own authors claim is not inspired.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 11, 2003.


If you do decide to read thru some of those books, I hope that you will see for yourself the heresy that existed and the filtering of that heresy and truth that took place and by whose authority the job of filetering fell on. Then (a big "then") , you might come to understand those other books, you refer as "apocrypha", and their place in the Holy Bible. I'm not asking you to become Catholic or anything. I'm asking you to broaden your understanding to bigger horizons in Christianity.

rod..

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 11, 2003.


David, I think the only book in the N.T. that claims to be inspired by God is the Book of Revelations. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Off hand I cannot think of any others.

At any rate, the writers of the New Testament were not aware they were writing scripture. They were simply writing letters to the various congregations and/or people under their charge.

Additionally, many of the O.T. books were written without the author's knowledge of divine inspiration as well.

Gotta run,

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), October 11, 2003.


Yikes! David.

What would happen if, after reading those books, you did convert?

Would that mean that your belief was wrong?

Do you fear those books because it may very well change your beliefs?

Or, do you fear that your belief may be too weak to face the truth?

Or, do we go back to square one and decide that those books reveal nothing that would support the validity of the current books, so there is no reason to remove those blinders?

If history is ignored, then surely there is no history there to learn from.

I hear there's a book burning going on down here in the Valley. I never thought that I would see such a thing in my lifetime. Surely, people are more educated than resorting to book burnings. Instead of learning from the past, ignorance prefers to burn the past and then perceive to live a happy ho-hum life with Goofy, Mickey Mouse, and the Tooth Fairy all cozy and warm in "La La Land Mercedes, Texas". Amazing!

rod..


-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 11, 2003.


Are you serious, Rod, a book burning? What's that about?

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), October 11, 2003.


Yup! Those old classics and some new stuff. I wish I had kept the news link on that burning. I think Gwen may still have that link. I'll search for it and post it.

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 11, 2003.


First, I'll say that anything can be turned into a learning experience, even books that go against our better judgements.

A discussion about the burnings from another forum.

A press release about the burnings from one of our Valley newspapers.

rod..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 11, 2003.


ooops! I should have had a better look at that forum before posting. The content of that forum could use some "burning" . Sorry. And, no! I'm not one of their forum members, in case somebody was wondering.

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 11, 2003.


Gail,

The statement that you made "At any rate, the writers of the New Testament were not aware they were writing scripture. They were simply writing letters to the various congregations and/or people under their charge." is NOT correct.

The Apostle Paul KNEW he was WRITING Scripture for he SPECIFICALLY stated in 1 Corinthians 14:37, "If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord."

What Paul WROTE were commands of the Lord.

In John 20:29-31, The Apostle John WROTE so people would have an eyewitness record of Jesus miracles and thereby could believe in Jesus and have life in His name, even though they did not personally see Him (cf. 21:24,25).

In 1 John 1:1-4; 2:1-17, The Apostle John WROTE so people could have his eyewitness testimony regarding Jesus, could have fellowship with God, could know we should not sin, and could be told God's commands we should obey.

In Revelation 1:1,2,10,11,19; chap. 2 & 3, The Apostle John was instructed by Jesus to WRITE a message from Jesus and the Spirit to instruct the churches of Asia regarding Jesus will for them (cf. 14:13; 19:9; 21:5).

In Ephesians 3:3-5, What The Apostle Paul received by revelation from the Spirit, he WROTE so others could understand what he had received.

In 1 Timothy 5:18, That which is properly called "Scripture" includes quotes from New Testament WRITING (Luke 10:7) right along with Old Testament writings.

In 2 Peter 3:15,16, The Apostle Peter classifies Paul's epistles right along with "OTHER SCRIPTURE". Hence, they should be treated with the same respect as any other Scripture.

In 2 Timothy 3:14-17, All Scripture (both OLD and NEW) is inspired by God and was given to teach and instruct men so they could know all good works. Just as Old Testament writings were given to be a guide that people must follow to please God in their day, so the New Testament serves as an inspired guide in this age.

All men and women, need to know God's will, and God desires everyone to have that opportunity. To meet this need, God inspired men to record His message in WRITING in the Scriptures.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 13, 2003.


James,

First, you didn't answer my earlier post! Second, I am NOT deprived of "food" for the Old Testament is NOT in force today. We live under New Testament law, and NOT Old Testament law. The gospel which is God's power to salvation (Rom. 1:16) and how one can OBEY the gospel and be saved are written in the New Testament. ALL of the Old Testament was NAILED TO THE CROSS. (Col. 2:14). One CANNOT read the Old Testament and learn what they must do to be saved.

No James, it was God who decided and NOT the Catholic Church which books should be contained in the Bible. God is the one who made sure what scripture was valid and what was not. Just because a church compiled a list does not mean a thing. The Word of the New Testament existed before the church (first given orally and then written). The church was born of the Word (Matt. 13:19; Luke 8:11). The Word was NOT born of the church nor is the Church the mother of the Word.

In one breath the Catholic Church professes to adore the Bible, uphold it and propagate it, in the next breath she will ridicule it, cast reflection upon it and seek to destroy faith in it.

In one breath she will say that the Bible is inspired of God, in the next she will say that it is incomplete and insufficient.

In one breath she will talk about the good it has produced; in the next she will talk about the insidious evil, the error and the division that have come through individuals studying and applying their own interpretations to it.

The Catholic Church will appeal to the Bible in efforts to uphold her doctrines before prospective converts and then claim that it is not the standard by which to measure anything religiously.

Talk about hypocrisy.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 13, 2003.


Kevin, do you think God chose the books of the Bible?

Think again.

Have you heard about the Book of Jashar, The Book of the wars of the Lord, The Book of the Kings of Israel, The Book of the Kings of Judah?.... They are now imbedded in Exodus, Deuteronomy, Samuel, I Kings, @ Kings, I Chronicles, and 2 chronicles.

My point: Human beings have condesed and compiled books by making revisions. I try to do my best to distinguish between the wheat and the chaff.

I reject the Song of Songs. Not about God. I do reject Judith, Tobit, and Job for not being historical accounts. Yet I accept 1 macabbees and Sirach.

Also, I accept most of Thomas (the Gospel), since mos of its sayings appear in the canonical Gospels. This shows something like Thomas was behind our modern versions of Mark, Matthew, and Luke.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), October 13, 2003.


Elpidio?

After reading much of the Gnostic writings, I get the feeling that the Church did not do a "perfect" job of removing much of the Gnostic influence from the Book of John. The major problem I see is with the contual use of the word "eat". I'm sure that you will agree with me when I say that the Gnostics meant to internalize the understanding of the Gospel/Word by the use of the word "eat". In other words, the Gnostic influence has survived in the Bible to this day. This is why the Church has their theology, I suppose, in order to refute the Gnostic residue. At least, I hope this is why.

rod

p.s. Glad to see you online, again.



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 14, 2003.


...make that "continual" rather than "contual".

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 14, 2003.


Before I get misunderstood about the Church...

The Catholic Church maintains their theology for bringing souls to the Body of Christ and Salvation. The idea that the truth is found in the Church negates any Gnostic influence. How's that for a disclaimer?

But, of course, by making such a statement, I will have made myself a target.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 14, 2003.


Kevin,

First, since you are deluded (though with such eagerness you think you are "The Truth" ~ but such is the case of All deluded people), you were grossly deaf to my answer to your post, therefore you insist that I did not answer your post. Did you get a chance to treat yourself to a Complete bible from a Catholic bookstore yet?

You carry, with great fire, the spirit of your spiritual father, the excommunicated Martin Luther.

Just like your father, you are rebellious and dissenting against the beliefs and teachings of the Rock, the 2000 year old Church of God the Son Jesus Christ, God the Father, God the Holy Spirit, the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Joseph, St. Peter, All the Holy Apostles, All the Popes, All the Bishops, All the Priest, Deacons, Religious, and Nuns ~ the One True and Everlasting Church Here on Earth and in Heaven, Yesterday, Today, and Forevermore ~ the Catholic Church!

You said, "We live under the New Testament Law and Not the Old Testament Law."

How ignorant you are indeed! The Catholic Church still upholds The Ten Commandments (and forever will)... of the Old Testament! Jesus Christ did not come to break the Law but to uphold it! The beautiful and wise Old Testament is the pre-figuration of Jesus Christ of the New Testament. The Old Testament is the story of the Jews, the forefathers of all christians. Jews are pre-Catholics and christians are Catholics. The Old Testament is the Root; the New Testament is the Vine and the Fruit. Please read the history of the early church fathers for your own edification and enlightenment. Anyways, just read history ~ a former Protestant, now a Catholic Venerable Cardinal John Henry Newman said that "to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."

God, indeed, decided which books should be contained in the Bible ~ but He implemented His Decision, certaintly not through the church of excommunicated Martin Luther (your church) ~ but through the Church of Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary and St. Peter, the Catholic Church (my church)!

Martin Luther himself conceded that the Catholic Church safeguarded and identified the Bible. He said, "We are obliged to yield many things to the Catholics ~ (for example), that they possess the Word of God, which we received from them; otherwise, we should have known nothing at all about it." Kevin, how could your father, Martin Luther concede, and you a Mere child of his not concede?

Your accusation that the Catholic Church "ridicules" the bible is absurd. The Catholic Church honors the Holy Bible. The Catholic Church meditates on three Bible passages (1 Old Testament, 2 New Testament ~ 1 Gospel, and 1 Epistle) Everyday with the congregation during Daily Mass. The Entire Bible is read to the entire congregation within three years. In addition to the Liturgy of the Word of the Daily Mass, we Catholics, can deepen our love for the Word of God by praying the Liturgy of the Hours, comprised of Bible passages divided up in the span of a year. If that is not enough encouragement by the Catholic Church for Catholics to read the Word of God, the Holy Bible, the Catholic Church also gives a plenary indulgence (forget this topic for now, it is not within your grasp for quite a while until you become a Catholic, I pray) from the spiritual treasury of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the Saints, to those who would read the Holy Bible for 30 minutes with the invocation of the Holy Spirit. Does your church of Martin Luther does that? No, only verses suitable to the whim of the "pastor" (not ordained by St. Peter and his Holy Apostles) and suitable to the cravings of the congregation (some baptised and some not baptised, but mostly presumptuous) are read. We know much about whims and cravings, do we?

You should inquire about hypocrisy from your father, Martin Luther, by reading more on how he became deluded from his own severe emotional problems. As I said to you earlier, your "zeal without knowledge is worthless" Proverbs 16:2.



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 15, 2003.


James,

You wrote earlier: "THE CATHOLIC CHURCH PRODUCED THE HOLY BIBLE AND NOT VICE VERSA"

To which I replied: "Really??? I say PROVE IT!!! In your reply, please give Book, Chapter and Verse which states that the Church produced the Bible."

In your reply to my initial post, the ONLY Scripture you gave was 1 Timothy 3:15 and that does NOT PROVE that the Church (much less the Catholic Church) produced the Bible.

You wrote in your last post: "First, since you are deluded (though with such eagerness you think you are "The Truth" ~ but such is the case of All deluded people), you were grossly deaf to my answer to your post, therefore you insist that I did not answer your post. Did you get a chance to treat yourself to a Complete bible from a Catholic bookstore yet?"

As you can see what I wrote above, you did NOT answer my post, so I am NOT deluded as you falsely charge. It is obvious that you did NOT even bother to read what you wrote because if you did, you would PLAINLY see that you AVOIDED the question and did NOT answer it at all!!! For your information, the ONLY complete Bibles are those that do NOT have any additions to them!!! Please do tell everyone here James why the Jews still to this day do NOT accept the Apocrypha as Scripture inspired by God???

You wrote, "You carry, with great fire, the spirit of your spiritual father, the excommunicated Martin Luther."

Sorry, Martin Luther is NOT my "spiritual father" and this is something else that I CHALLENGE you to PROVE.

You wrote, "Just like your father, you are rebellious and dissenting against the beliefs and teachings of the Rock, the 2000 year old Church of God the Son Jesus Christ, God the Father, God the Holy Spirit, the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Joseph, St. Peter, All the Holy Apostles, All the Popes, All the Bishops, All the Priest, Deacons, Religious, and Nuns ~ the One True and Everlasting Church Here on Earth and in Heaven, Yesterday, Today, and Forevermore ~ the Catholic Church!"

The Catholic Church has NEVER been and NEVER will be the "TRUE CHURCH"!!!!!

First, there is NO MENTION of Mary EVER remaining a VIRGIN after she had Jesus in the New Testament!!! Strike One.

Second, there is NO MENTION of the office of Pope in the New Testament!!! Strike Two.

Third, there is NO MENTION of any Nuns in the New Testament!!! Strike Three, you are OUT!!!

I wrote, "We live under the New Testament Law and Not the Old Testament Law."

To which you replied: "How ignorant you are indeed! The Catholic Church still upholds The Ten Commandments (and forever will)... of the Old Testament! Jesus Christ did not come to break the Law but to uphold it! The beautiful and wise Old Testament is the pre-figuration of Jesus Christ of the New Testament. The Old Testament is the story of the Jews, the forefathers of all christians. Jews are pre-Catholics and christians are Catholics. The Old Testament is the Root; the New Testament is the Vine and the Fruit. Please read the history of the early church fathers for your own edification and enlightenment. Anyways, just read history ~ a former Protestant, now a Catholic Venerable Cardinal John Henry Newman said that "to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."

James, it is obvious that you really do NOT know what you are talking about. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black, I am not the one who is "ignorant" as you FALSELY charge. Is this the tactic that Catholics resort to when they do NOT have an answer from the Word of God??? They FALSELY ACCUSE and call people NAMES??? This is a TYPICAL response from a Catholic (who claims to be a Christian) that instead of REASONING, they resort to NAME CALLING and throwing out false accusations.

The FACT of the matter is, the Apostle Paul told the church at Galatia in Gal. 3:24-25, "Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor." The LAW was ALL of the OT Law which INCLUDED the Ten Commandments.

In Eph. 2:14-17, the Apostle Paul tells the church at Ephesus that Jesus broke down the middle wall of separation ? the OT Law and ABOLISHED (v 15) the ENMITY that is EXACTLY the LAW OF COMMANDMENTS CONTAINED IN ORDINANCES which INCLUDED the Ten Commandments.

The Apostle Paul ONCE AGAIN admonished the church at Galatia that if they wanted to be justified by LAW, they were FALLEN FROM GRACE. This LAW included the Ten Commandments. (See Gal. 5:4).

You wrote, "Jesus Christ did not come to break the Law but to uphold it!" To which I agree, He did NOT break the Law He observed the Law for that LAW (OT LAW) was still in force when He died on the cross. The terms of entrance into the church were NOT given UNTIL Jesus died for Hebrews 9:17 states, "For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives."

In Matthew 5:17, Jesus said "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill." Jesus further stated in verse 18 that nothing would pass from the Law (OT) until that time when all of it would be fulfilled. That time came when He died on the cross. At that time, ALL of the OT was fulfilled or filled full. Upon its fulfillment, it had served the purpose of bringing man INTO Christ (See Gal. 3:24-25, Rom. 10:4). Because it had served it's purpose, it was at that time, taken out of the way. It was NAILED TO THE CROSS in His Death. (Col. 2:14). When Christ (the Testator) died, His New Covenant became effective. (Heb. 9:16-17). A BETTER covenant which was established on BETTER PROMISES, for if that First Covenant (OT) had been faultless, then should NO PLACE have been sought for the second (NT). (See Heb. 8:7-8).

You wrote, "The Catholic Church still upholds The Ten Commandments (and forever will)... of the Old Testament!"

If this is TRUE, that the Ten Commandments are still in force, then why does the Catholic Church BREAK the Ten Commandments??? The FOURTH Commandment states, "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it." (Ex. 20:8-11).

Please tell everyone here James why CATHOLICS do NOT obey this COMMANDMENT??? You (as a Catholic) claim to UPHOLD IT, so why do you BREAK IT and NOT OBSERVE IT???

You wrote, "God, indeed, decided which books should be contained in the Bible ~ but He implemented His Decision, certaintly not through the church of excommunicated Martin Luther (your church) ~ but through the Church of Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary and St. Peter, the Catholic Church (my church)!"

There is ONLY one church, and it most certainly is NOT the Catholic Church. I am not a member of the church in which Martin Luther founded (the Lutherans), NOR am I a member of any Protestant denomination that came from the Catholic Church. I am a member of the church in which Jesus built, the church of Christ!!! This church knows NOTHING of the "Virgin Mary" NOR of any man in charge of it.

You wrote, "Martin Luther himself conceded that the Catholic Church safeguarded and identified the Bible. He said, "We are obliged to yield many things to the Catholics ~ (for example), that they possess the Word of God, which we received from them; otherwise, we should have known nothing at all about it." Kevin, how could your father, Martin Luther concede, and you a Mere child of his not concede?"

It really does NOT matter what Martin Luther wrote, because he was NOT a Christian to begin with. Catholics do NOT "possess the Word of God" as you FALSELY ASSERT. Please tell everyone here James how a Church can CATALOG a book (the Bible) and then CLAIM (FALSELY) that they OWN IT??? In my earlier post I showed how the Bible CANNOT be a Catholic book and I CHALLENGE you to PROVE me wrong.

You wrote, "Your accusation that the Catholic Church "ridicules" the bible is absurd."

No, NOT absurd, but TRUE.

You wrote, "The Catholic Church honors the Holy Bible. The Catholic Church meditates on three Bible passages (1 Old Testament, 2 New Testament ~ 1 Gospel, and 1 Epistle) Everyday with the congregation during Daily Mass."

If this is true, then please answer this question: The Catholic version of Romans 6:4 states, "For we are buried with him by means of baptism into death." But the Catholic Church officially accepts sprinkling for baptism. If baptism is a BURIAL (and it is), then please tell everyone here why the Catholic Church took it upon themselves to CHANGE the Word of God to allow SPRINKLING for Baptism??? Please tell everyone how SPRINKLING is a BURIAL???

Catholics claim that infants can be baptized for the remission of sin, but NOT ONE example is found in the Word of God that will support this FALSE doctrine. Catholics make the ignorant claim that one can be baptized and then the Holy Spirit can "infuse" one with faith, but that is NOT TRUE. All of the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased when the "perfect" written Word of God was completed. (1 Cor. 13:10).

Since Catholics claim that one can be baptized as an infant who is WITHOUT FAITH in the gospel of Christ, then they are NOT confessing that Jesus has come in the flesh and are therefore "a deceiver and an ANTICHRIST." (2 John 4:7).

You wrote, "The Entire Bible is read to the entire congregation within three years. In addition to the Liturgy of the Word of the Daily Mass, we Catholics, can deepen our love for the Word of God by praying the Liturgy of the Hours, comprised of Bible passages divided up in the span of a year."

Hearing the Word of God is NOT enough for Jesus stated in Luke 8:21, "My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it."

You wrote, "If that is not enough encouragement by the Catholic Church for Catholics to read the Word of God, the Holy Bible, the Catholic Church also gives a plenary indulgence (forget this topic for now, it is not within your grasp for quite a while until you become a Catholic, I pray) from the spiritual treasury of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the Saints, to those who would read the Holy Bible for 30 minutes with the invocation of the Holy Spirit."

First, please do tell James where there is any such thing as a "plenary indulgence" in the Word of God??? Please give book, chapter and verse in your reply. Catholics claim to follow the Bible, but in their own words they DENY that it is the ONLY source of inspiration (2 Tim. 3:16-17) and they claim that without the Catholic Church no one can be saved. The gospel is the power of God to salvation, NOT the Catholic Church as they would have you believe. (Romans 1:16).

The Bible does NOT mention NOR give authority for ANY of the following Catholic practices: a pope, a cardinal, a college of cardinals, metropolitans, patriarchs, councils, the Vatican, religious orders, parishes, dioceses, archdioceses, nuns, sacraments, original sin, infant baptism, sprinkling for baptism, confirmation, the mass, transubstantiation, rosaries, indulgences, etc. or a host of other things that make up the doctrines and practices of the Catholic Church. The list goes on and on and on.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 16, 2003.


Kevin.

If you maintain that your Bible is complete and correct, but you deny the works of Martin Luther, you are in error. Why haven't you questioned Luther, yet you criticize his false faith? I'm not so sure that you can have both feet in different rooms. If you believe the Bible that you keep, then you have to acknowledge that Luther was correct in censoring the Bible. If you criticize Luther, than you must give some credit to the compilers of the Catholic Bible. Which one will it be?

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 17, 2003.


Kevin,

You are anti-Catholic. You are anti-Blessed Virgin Mary (you deny her Virginity and you probably think she is the whore of Babylon) You are anti-Pope (you probably think he is the Anti-Christ) You are anti-anything Catholic. You are anti-anything related to anything Catholic.

AND

You worship on the Sabbath Day ~ Saturday for you. (The New Testament Holy Apostles gather for Mass on Sunday)

YOU MUST BE

a Seventh-Day Adventist!!!

Huh!

If your are, then I would know what kind of SNAKE I'm dealing with (or would rather not deal with.) Even mainstream Protestants do not like your kind ~ they think your religion is a cult! You follow the cultic teachings of Ellen White!

Is that the the Deluded church you belong to? (you probably think you belong to the "remnant church") If not, what is your FANTASTIC church ??? Reveal your SPOTS!

If ever you get to Heaven (the one where the Most Holy Trinity is, the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Joseph, and part of the Catholic Church is right now; the remainder of the Catholic Church will be in Heaven as well) you will be in the presence of the Mother of God, The QUEEN OF HEAVEN ~ The Blessed Virgin Mary.

I advise you to make ammends with her right now by praying this prayer with your whole heart (also, Jesus Christ is angry with you for blaspheming His Mother! Also, St. Peter, the First Pope is angry with you as well!)

AN ACT OF REPARATION FOR BLASPHEMIES AGAINST THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY

Most glorious Virgin Mary, Mother of God and our Mother, turn shine eyes in pity upon us, miserable sinners; we are sore afflicted by the many evils that surround us in this life, but especially do we feel our hearts break within us upon hearing the dreadful insults and blasphemies uttered against thee, O Virgin Immaculate.

O how these impious sayings offend the infinite Majesty of God and of His only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ! How they provoke His indignation and give us cause to fear the terrible effects of His vengeance! Would that the sacrifice of our lives might avail to put an end to such outrages and blasphemies; were it so, how gladly we should make it, for we desire, O most holy Mother, to love thee and to honor thee with all our hearts, since this is the will of God. And just because we love thee, we will do all that is in our power to make thee honored and loved by all men. In the meantime do thou, our merciful Mother, the supreme comforter of the afflicted, accept this our act of reparation which we offer thee for ourselves and for all our families, as well as for all who impiously blaspheme thee, not knowing what they say. Do thou obtain for them from Almighty God the grace of conversion, and thus render more manifest and more glorious thy kindness, thy power and thy great mercy. May they join with us in proclaiming thee blessed among women, the Immaculate Virgin and most compassionate Mother of God.

In the Name of Jesus Christ Our Lord. Amen.

Get out of your cult before it's too late !!! Run to the Catholic Church !!!

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 17, 2003.


rod,

You wrote, "If you maintain that your Bible is complete and correct, but you deny the works of Martin Luther, you are in error."

If this is true, then please tell everyone rod why the name "Martin Luther" is NOT mentioned in the Bible??? If I claim that the Bible (without the Apocrypha) is COMPLETE and CORRECT (and it is), then if I deny the works of a MAN, how am I in error??? If the Jews who were entrusted with the "oracles of God" (the Old Testament - Romans 3:1-2), how can you make the FALSE CLAIM that the Catholic Church has any AUTHORITY to ADD to the Scriptures if they were NEVER entrusted them at all??? It is the Catholic Church that is in ERROR for ADDING to God's word.

You wrote, "Why haven't you questioned Luther, yet you criticize his false faith? I'm not so sure that you can have both feet in different rooms. If you believe the Bible that you keep, then you have to acknowledge that Luther was correct in censoring the Bible. If you criticize Luther, than you must give some credit to the compilers of the Catholic Bible. Which one will it be?"

Because Luther was NOT a Christian to begin with!!! He went from one extreme (a meritorious works based salvation - the Catholic Church) to the other extreme (salvation based on faith only - ALL Denominations) of which NEITHER are CORRECT.

James,

You wrote, "You are anti-Catholic. You are anti-Blessed Virgin Mary (you deny her Virginity and you probably think she is the whore of Babylon)"

Yes, I am "Anti-Catholic" because there is NO such thing as a Catholic-Christian.

I do NOT deny that Mary was a Virgin when she gave birth to Jesus. What I deny is that she remained a Virgin after Jesus was born. Your FALSE DOCTRINE that Mary remained a "perpetual Virgin" is WITHOUT Biblical support!!! Not only is this without a basis from God's word, it is an outright CONTRADICTION of what is said in Matthew 13:55-56. The inspired record also says of Joseph, "and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son..." (Matt. 1:25). It is OBVIOUS that Catholics have NOT read their Bible for the text PLAINLY states that Mary did NOT remain a Virgin after the birth of Jesus.

You wrote, "You are anti-Pope (you probably think he is the Anti-Christ) You are anti-anything Catholic. You are anti-anything related to anything Catholic."

To this I say AMEN!!!! The Word of God AND the church of Christ is ANTI to anything related to anyone who is a Catholic. I showed you how the Catholic FALSE DOCTRINE of SPRINKLING and POURING is NOT in accordance with the Word of God and I CHALLENGE you to PROVE ME WRONG!!!

There is NO SUCH THING as the office of Pope listed in the Word of God. The Pope, who IS THE MAN OF SIN as the Apostle Paul described him in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, "who OPPOIThe Pope, who is the man of sin as the Apostle Paul described him in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, "who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." The Pope claims to take the place of God on earth. (This is EXACTLY what this verse above states). Paul continues in 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7, "And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 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." The mystery of "lawlessness" was this as stated by Paul in Acts 20:29-30, "For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves." This is EXACTLY what happened with the eldership as they moved to "draw away the disciples after themselves" and eventually ended up with ONE elder (or bishop), the Pope. The force that was "restraining" was the Roman Empire. The pope did NOT come into power UNTIL the Roman Empire was overthrown. Paul continued his description of the Pope in 2 Thessalonians 2:8-12, "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. The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. WHO OPPOSES AND EXALTS HIMSELF ABOVE ALL that is called God or that is worshiped, so that HE SITS AS GOD in the temple of God, SHOWING HIMSELF THAT HE IS GOD."

The Pope CLAIMS TO TAKE THE PLACE OF GOD ON EARTH. This is EXACTLY what the verses above state.

Paul continues in 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7, "And now you know what is restraining, that HE MAY BE REVEALED IN HIS OWN TIME. 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."

The mystery of "lawlessness" was this as stated by Paul in Acts 20:29-30, "For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves."

This is EXACTLY what happened with the eldership as they moved to "draw away the disciples after themselves" and eventually ended up with ONE elder (or bishop), the Pope in charge.

The force that was "restraining" was the Roman Empire. The Pope did NOT come into power UNTIL the Roman Empire was overthrown.

Paul continued his description of the MAN OF SIN (the Pope) in 2 Thessalonians 2:8-12, "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. The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, WITH ALL POWER, SIGNS, and LYING WONDERS, and with ALL UNRIGHTEOUS DECEPTION AMONG THOSE WHO PERISH, because THEY DID NOT RECEIVE THE LOVE OF THE TRUTH, that they might be saved. And for this reason GOD WILL SEND THEM STRONG DELUSION, that THEY SHOULD BELIEVE THE LIE, that THEY ALL MAY BE CONDEMNED who DID NOT BELIEVE the TRUTH but HAD PLEASURE in UNRIGHTEOUSNESS."

You wrote, "You worship on the Sabbath Day ~ Saturday for you. (The New Testament Holy Apostles gather for Mass on Sunday)"

No, this is another FALSE ACCUSATION. I told you that Catholics DENY the Ten Commandments for the FOURTH COMMANDMENT PLAINLY states to "keep the Sabbath day HOLY" and if you claim that the Ten Commandments are in force, then you are BREAKING THEM for NOT OBSERVING the Sabbath day as God CLEARLY and PLAINLY COMMANDS. I do NOT worship on the Sabbath day, for the Sabbath day was ONLY given to the Jews as were the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments were NEVER given to the New Testament church to observe!!! They along with all of the Old Testament were NAILED TO THE CROSS when Jesus died. (Colossians 2:14).

You continued with: "YOU MUST BE a Seventh-Day Adventist!!! Huh! If your are, then I would know what kind of SNAKE I'm dealing with (or would rather not deal with.) Even mainstream Protestants do not like your kind ~ they think your religion is a cult! You follow the cultic teachings of Ellen White! Is that the the Deluded church you belong to? (you probably think you belong to the "remnant church") If not, what is your FANTASTIC church ??? Reveal your SPOTS!"

I am NOT a "Seventh-Day Adventist" because the First day of the week - Sunday is our day of worship. I am a member of the church which Jesus built, the church of Christ.

You wrote, "If ever you get to Heaven (the one where the Most Holy Trinity is, the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Joseph, and part of the Catholic Church is right now;"

The FALSE DOCTRINE that Mary was taken into heaven (the assumption of Mary) is NOT TAUGHT in the Bible. Virginity before marriage is a virtue, but after marriage it is NOT a virtue (Heb. 13:4). In fact, to refuse the sexual union with one's marriage spouse (Joseph) is a SIN because it tempts one's spouse to commit fornication (1 Cor. 7:2-5). Jesus had "brothers and sisters" in the very same sense that Mary was His "mother" (Matt. 12:46-50; Mark 6:3). (Note that "sister" NEVER refers in the gospel to a cousin or more distant relative. There was a different Greek word for a female cousin or kinswoman - Luke 1:36.)

You wrote: "the remainder of the Catholic Church will be in Heaven as well) you will be in the presence of the Mother of God, The QUEEN OF HEAVEN ~ The Blessed Virgin Mary."

This is another FALSE Catholic doctrine that Mary is the "QUEEN OF HEAVEN"!!! If Mary is the "queen of heaven", I CHALLENGE you to PROVE IT!!! Please show everyone here James where the Word of God EVER states that Mary is the "queen of heaven"!

You wrote, "I advise you to make ammends with her right now by praying this prayer with your whole heart (also, Jesus Christ is angry with you for blaspheming His Mother!"

I have NOT offended Mary, for Mary does NOT know anything for she is dead. Ecclesiastes 9:5 states, "But the dead know nothing," Jesus is also NOT "angry" with me as you FALSELY accuse me once again for He PLAINLY stated in Luke 8:21, "My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it." How can someone "blaspheme" something that is NOT TRUE to begin with???

You wrote, "Also, St. Peter, the First Pope is angry with you as well!)"

"And he (Christ) is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things He (Christ) might have the preeminence" (Colossians 1:18). "And hath put all things under His feet, and gave Him (Christ) to be the head over all things to the church" (Ephesians 1:22). "But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into Him in all things, which is the head, even Christ" (Ephesians 4:15). "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church" (Ephesians 5:23).

The Catholic Church, in acknowledging the clear teaching in Scripture that Christ is the head of the church, attempts to justify its position by stating that the pope is the visible head while Christ is the invisible head. This, PLAINLY and CLEARLY CONTRADICTS the Biblical picture of the church as a body; WHAT BODY HAS TWO HEADS??? Jesus said, "I am the good shepherd" (John 10:14). He further said that there would be "one flock with one shepherd" (John 10:16). NOT TWO SHEPHERDS! Thus, there is NO such thing as the office of Pope.

The Pope is called the Vicar of Christ as the Head of the Church on earth. Vicar means deputy; one who takes another's place. However, in John 14:26, 15:26 and 16:7 we read of the TRUE Vicar of Christ, the Holy Spirit. Why does man think it right to ascribe to a man that which is only rightly ascribed to God, His Son, or the Holy Spirit?!

James, if you remain a Catholic, you will NOT be saved!!! I will pray that God will open your eyes to the TRUTH of His word that you might be saved.

God has laid down the requirements for salvation. He has COMMANDED us to:

1. Hear the gospel (Rom. 10:17, Jas. 1:21) 2. Believe the gospel (John 8:24, Heb. 11:6, John 3:16, John 6:45) 3. Repent of our sins (Acts 17:30, Acts 26:2, Luke 13:3) 4. Confess Jesus as Lord (Phil. 2:11, John 12:42, Rom. 10:9, Matt. 10:32, Acts 8:37) 5. Be Baptized for the forgiveness of our sins (Matt. 28:19, John 3:5, Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38) 6. Remain faithful until we die. (Rev. 2:10)

Only those who OBEY God will receive salvation. You will be shocked to find on judgment day that you have been lied to by the Catholic Church, and while you are still on earth, it is not too late for you to obey the gospel and be saved. Jesus said in Luke 6:46, "But why do you call Me 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do the things which I say?"

Unless you obey the gospel, YOU WILL BE LOST. (2 Thes. 1:7).

Now is a good time for you to study the Book of Acts where the Holy Spirit has recorded several accounts of conversion and salvation. When you do what they did you will be as they were. This is what one must do to be saved. Please consult Acts 2:14-47; 6:7; 8:4-13, 26-40; 9:6, 17-19; 22:16; 10:34-48; 11:14; 15:7-11; 16:14, 15; 18:7, 8; 19:1-5.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 17, 2003.


David,

Please delete my post above as it contains errors. I will re-post below.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 17, 2003.


rod,

You wrote, "If you maintain that your Bible is complete and correct, but you deny the works of Martin Luther, you are in error."

If this is true, then please tell everyone rod why the name "Martin Luther" is NOT mentioned in the Bible??? If I claim that the Bible (without the Apocrypha) is COMPLETE and CORRECT (and it is), then if I deny the works of a MAN (Martin Luther), how am I in error??? If the Jews who were entrusted with the "oracles of God" (the Old Testament - Romans 3:1-2), how can you make the FALSE CLAIM that the Catholic Church has any AUTHORITY to ADD to the Scriptures if they were NEVER entrusted them at all??? It is the Catholic Church that is in ERROR for ADDING to God's word.

You wrote, "Why haven't you questioned Luther, yet you criticize his false faith? I'm not so sure that you can have both feet in different rooms. If you believe the Bible that you keep, then you have to acknowledge that Luther was correct in censoring the Bible. If you criticize Luther, than you must give some credit to the compilers of the Catholic Bible. Which one will it be?"

Because Luther was NOT a Christian to begin with!!! He went from one extreme (a meritorious works based salvation - the Catholic Church) to the other extreme (salvation based on faith only - ALL Denominations) of which NEITHER are CORRECT.

James,

You wrote, "You are anti-Catholic. You are anti-Blessed Virgin Mary (you deny her Virginity and you probably think she is the whore of Babylon)"

Yes, I am "Anti-Catholic" because there is NO such thing as a Catholic-Christian.

I do NOT deny that Mary was a Virgin when she gave birth to Jesus. What I deny is that she remained a Virgin after Jesus was born. Your FALSE DOCTRINE that Mary remained a "perpetual Virgin" is WITHOUT Biblical support!!! Not only is this without a basis from God's word, it is an outright CONTRADICTION of what is said in Matthew 13:55-56.

The inspired record also says of Joseph, "and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son..." (Matt. 1:25). It is OBVIOUS that Catholics have NOT read their Bible for the text PLAINLY states that Mary did NOT remain a Virgin after the birth of Jesus.

You wrote, "You are anti-Pope (you probably think he is the Anti-Christ) You are anti-anything Catholic. You are anti-anything related to anything Catholic."

To this I say AMEN!!!! The Word of God AND the church of Christ is ANTI to anything related to anyone who is a Catholic. I showed you how the Catholic FALSE DOCTRINE of SPRINKLING and POURING is NOT in accordance with the Word of God and I CHALLENGE you to PROVE ME WRONG!!!

There is NO SUCH THING as the office of Pope listed in the Word of God. The Pope, who IS THE MAN OF SIN as the Apostle Paul described him in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, " WHO OPPOSES AND EXALTS HIMSELF ABOVE ALL that is called God or that is worshiped, so that HE SITS AS GOD in the temple of God, SHOWING HIMSELF THAT HE IS GOD."

Paul continues in 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7, "And now you know what is restraining, that HE MAY BE REVEALED IN HIS OWN TIME. 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."

The mystery of "lawlessness" was this as stated by Paul in Acts 20:29-30, "For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves."

This is EXACTLY what happened with the eldership as they moved to "draw away the disciples after themselves" and eventually ended up with ONE elder (or bishop), the Pope in charge.

The force that was "restraining" was the Roman Empire. The Pope did NOT come into power UNTIL the Roman Empire was overthrown.

Paul continued his description of the MAN OF SIN (the Pope) in 2 Thessalonians 2:8-12, "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. The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, WITH ALL POWER, SIGNS, and LYING WONDERS, and with ALL UNRIGHTEOUS DECEPTION AMONG THOSE WHO PERISH, because THEY DID NOT RECEIVE THE LOVE OF THE TRUTH, that they might be saved. And for this reason GOD WILL SEND THEM STRONG DELUSION, that THEY SHOULD BELIEVE THE LIE, that THEY ALL MAY BE CONDEMNED who DID NOT BELIEVE the TRUTH but HAD PLEASURE in UNRIGHTEOUSNESS."

Catholics BELIEVE THE LIE that the Pope is the head of the church and they WILL PERISH.

You wrote, "You worship on the Sabbath Day ~ Saturday for you. (The New Testament Holy Apostles gather for Mass on Sunday)"

No, this is another FALSE ACCUSATION. I told you that Catholics DENY the Ten Commandments for the FOURTH COMMANDMENT PLAINLY states to "keep the Sabbath day HOLY" and if you claim that the Ten Commandments are in force, then you are BREAKING THEM for NOT OBSERVING the Sabbath day as God CLEARLY and PLAINLY COMMANDS. I do NOT worship on the Sabbath day, for the Sabbath day was ONLY given to the Jews as were the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments were NEVER given to the New Testament church to observe!!! They along with all of the Old Testament were NAILED TO THE CROSS when Jesus died. (Colossians 2:14).

You continued with: "YOU MUST BE a Seventh-Day Adventist!!! Huh! If your are, then I would know what kind of SNAKE I'm dealing with (or would rather not deal with.) Even mainstream Protestants do not like your kind ~ they think your religion is a cult! You follow the cultic teachings of Ellen White! Is that the the Deluded church you belong to? (you probably think you belong to the "remnant church") If not, what is your FANTASTIC church ??? Reveal your SPOTS!"

I am NOT a "Seventh-Day Adventist" because the First day of the week - Sunday is our day of worship. If you would have read my last post, you would not have wasted your time in stating that I followed the "cultic teachings of Ellen White". Go back and re-read my last post to find out the church of which I am a member.

You wrote, "If ever you get to Heaven (the one where the Most Holy Trinity is, the Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Joseph, and part of the Catholic Church is right now;"

The FALSE DOCTRINE that Mary was taken into heaven (the assumption of Mary) is NOT TAUGHT in the Bible. Virginity before marriage is a virtue, but after marriage it is NOT a virtue (Heb. 13:4). In fact, to refuse the sexual union with one's marriage spouse (Joseph) is a SIN because it tempts one's spouse to commit fornication (1 Cor. 7:2-5). Jesus had "brothers and sisters" in the very same sense that Mary was His "mother" (Matt. 12:46-50; Mark 6:3). (Note that "sister" NEVER refers in the gospel to a cousin or more distant relative. There was a different Greek word for a female cousin or kinswoman - Luke 1:36.)

You wrote: "the remainder of the Catholic Church will be in Heaven as well) you will be in the presence of the Mother of God, The QUEEN OF HEAVEN ~ The Blessed Virgin Mary."

This is another FALSE Catholic doctrine that Mary is the "QUEEN OF HEAVEN"!!! If Mary is the "queen of heaven", I CHALLENGE you to PROVE IT!!! Please show everyone here James where the Word of God EVER states that Mary is the "queen of heaven"!

You wrote, "I advise you to make ammends with her right now by praying this prayer with your whole heart (also, Jesus Christ is angry with you for blaspheming His Mother!"

I have NOT offended Mary, for Mary does NOT know anything for she is dead. Ecclesiastes 9:5 states, "But the dead know nothing," Jesus is also NOT "angry" with me as you FALSELY accuse me once again for He PLAINLY stated in Luke 8:21, "My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it." How can someone "blaspheme" something that is NOT TRUE to begin with???

You wrote, "Also, St. Peter, the First Pope is angry with you as well!)"

"And he (Christ) is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things He (Christ) might have the preeminence" (Colossians 1:18). "And hath put all things under His feet, and gave Him (Christ) to be the head over all things to the church" (Ephesians 1:22). "But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into Him in all things, which is the head, even Christ" (Ephesians 4:15). "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church" (Ephesians 5:23).

The Catholic Church, in acknowledging the clear teaching in Scripture that Christ is the head of the church, attempts to justify its position by stating that the pope is the visible head while Christ is the invisible head. This, PLAINLY and CLEARLY CONTRADICTS the Biblical picture of the church as a body; WHAT BODY HAS TWO HEADS??? Jesus said, "I am the good shepherd" (John 10:14). He further said that there would be "one flock with one shepherd" (John 10:16). NOT TWO SHEPHERDS! Thus, there is NO such thing as the office of Pope.

The Pope is called the Vicar of Christ as the Head of the Church on earth. Vicar means deputy; one who takes another's place. However, in John 14:26, 15:26 and 16:7 we read of the TRUE Vicar of Christ, the Holy Spirit. Why does man think it right to ascribe to a man that which is only rightly ascribed to God, His Son, or the Holy Spirit?!

James, if you remain a Catholic, you will NOT be saved!!! I will pray that God will open your eyes to the TRUTH of His word that you might be saved.

God has laid down the requirements for salvation. He has COMMANDED us to:

1. Hear the gospel (Rom. 10:17, Jas. 1:21) 2. Believe the gospel (John 8:24, Heb. 11:6, John 3:16, John 6:45) 3. Repent of our sins (Acts 17:30, Acts 26:2, Luke 13:3) 4. Confess Jesus as Lord (Phil. 2:11, John 12:42, Rom. 10:9, Matt. 10:32, Acts 8:37) 5. Be Baptized for the forgiveness of our sins (Matt. 28:19, John 3:5, Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38) 6. Remain faithful until we die. (Rev. 2:10)

Only those who OBEY God will receive salvation. You will be shocked to find on judgment day that you have been lied to by the Catholic Church, and while you are still on earth, it is not too late for you to obey the gospel and be saved. Jesus said in Luke 6:46, "But why do you call Me 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do the things which I say?"

Unless you obey the gospel, YOU WILL BE LOST. (2 Thes. 1:7).

Now is a good time for you to study the Book of Acts where the Holy Spirit has recorded several accounts of conversion and salvation. When you do what they did you will be as they were. This is what one must do to be saved. Please consult Acts 2:14-47; 6:7; 8:4-13, 26-40; 9:6, 17-19; 22:16; 10:34-48; 11:14; 15:7-11; 16:14, 15; 18:7, 8; 19:1-5.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 17, 2003.


Yes, Kevin. Those who are dead know nothing. I agree. But, I don't think that we are talking about the physically dead; we are talking about the spiritually dead. We are referring to those who, after hearing the Word, refuse to accept the Word are "dead". Our Souls live forever and never die. There is a difference between eternal life and eternal suffering.

My question has been posed about the soul having to struggle with our earthly burdens of Salvation. If the souls in Heaven must intercede for us, do they perceive any suffering? If yes, than what is Heaven? Is Heaven no longer an eternity of bliss, or do the interceding souls have no sadness or remorse for our struggles? I know your answers to my questions, Kevin. But, who's theology is correct?

rod..


-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 17, 2003.


When we are born into this world, we are dead. We receive life when we accept the Word. Even the Gnostics believed this, kind of. They viewed dead things coming to like once we understand them, when we see the "light". Of course, their warped thinking had nothing to do with the actual belief that Jesus was the way to eternal life. They thought that Jesus only had this great mysterious knowledge of or "gnosis".

(door bell)

rod..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 17, 2003.


Kevin,

I am in horror of all the Blasphemies that spewed out of your filthy mouth against the Catholic Church, against the Blessed VIRGIN, VIRGIN, VIRGIN, PERPETUALLY VIRGIN Mary, against St. Peter and His Successors ~ the Popes, etc.!!! May God forgive you!

You said, "I am a member of the church in which Jesus built, the church of Christ!!! This church knows NOTHING of the "Virgin Mary" NOR of any man in charge of it."

Please enlighten me ... what is the Name of your church? or what denomination (you said that you are not a member of any Protestant denomination, are you non-denominational?)

Please give me a brief History of Your "church."

Surely, it just did not spoof this year, 2003. So when did your church Spoof!? Who are the founding fathers of your Blaspheming church? How many deluded members worldwide? Or are you a one and only member of your own church (I will not be surprised if you are a singular member)? Are there any important or significant Deluded members aside from you? In other words, who are the Deluded Heroes/Prominent Deluded Figures of your Deluded church? Are they all as Blaspheming and Deluded as you are? I would like to get acquainted more about the Deluded church you are so proud of ~ History Please!

You said, "Yes, I am "Anti-Catholic" because there is NO such thing as a Catholic-Christian."

Which planet are you from? There are 1 Billion Catholic Christians worldwide as of 2003! ~ all Continents! all Countries! (just as Jesus said that His Church will go to the ends of the earth! Also, when Christ said that the mustard seed will grow into a big tree where birds will nests ~ that's the Catholic Church indeed!

Holy Mary is a Perpetual Virgin! This is Divine Revelation revealed to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. This is the Revelation of the Holy Spirit to the Catholic Church who loves Mary because Mary is the Mother of the Church. You better pray the Act of Reparation for the Blasphemies Against the Blessed Virgin Mary ~ with great zeal, you deny her Perpetual Virginity and you deny her Assumption and you deny her Queenship! (You are on the Blessed Virgin Mary's Red List)

You said, "The Pope is the Man of Sin and the Lawless one."

The Pope is the highest Holy Priest on earth after Jesus Christ ascended. St. Peter is the first Pope. The Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals. Popes hold the chair and Authority of St. Peter to whom Jesus Christ gave the Keys and appointed the Head of His Church. How dare you malign the office of the Pope! (You are on St. Peter's Red List)

The Catholic Church does not break the Fourth Commandment nor any Commandment but upholds All the Commandments. Please explain further your accusation that the Catholic Church breaks the Fourth Commandment. How does the Catholic Church do that?

The following is for your catechesis:

WHY WAS JESUS BORN OF A VIRGIN ?

Jesus was born of a virgin because His Father Willed it. It would have been possible for Christ to have had a human father; but it was eminently fitting that His mother be a virgin and His conception miraculous. Throughout the centuries of preparation for the coming of Christ, God had worked wonders in the conception of His servants who prepared the way for the coming of His Son. Abraham received a son from Sarah only when she was old and past the child-bearing period. Elizabeth, who had been sterile, in her old age miraculously conceived John the Baptist, the precursor of Christ. It is only right, therefore, that an even greater miracle should mark the conception and birth of the Redeemer Himself. God determined that Jesus should have no earthly father. He would be God’s own Son. It was fitting, too, that the womb that bore the Son of God should not thereafter bear a mere human child. Therefore, Mary, the Mother of God and the Spouse of the Holy Spirit, remained forever Virgin after the birth of Christ. *

WHY DO WE REFER TO MARY AS : THE MOTHER OF GOD ?

Mary is the Mother of God because it was from her that the Second Divine Person took His human nature. Mary gave to Jesus what every mother gives her child -- flesh and blood. But her son is not only human but Divine. Jesus Christ, whose mother she is, is God; therefore she is, in fact, the Mother of God, as The Church has always believed. *

WHY DID THE ANGEL GABRIEL GREET MARY, “HAIL, FAVORED ONE! THE LORD IS WITH YOU” ?

The Angel Gabriel greeted Mary thus because, since she was destined to be the Mother of God, Mary is the most highly privileged of all God’s creatures. She is the only human person who was preserved from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her conception. We call this her Immaculate Conception. Moreover, so perfectly did Mary cooperate with God’s Plan for her that she is the holiest of all His creatures. Throughout all her life she was never guilty of the slightest sin or failure to do God’s Will. *

WHY DOES MARY MERIT THE TITLE : MOTHER OF THE CHURCH ?

This title, as well as most of Our Lady’s other titles, stems from three basic facts : 1. It was she from whom the Second Divine Person took his human nature. She is the Mother of Jesus, our brother, and therefore the Mother of all people. 2. By her complete identification with and acceptance of the offering Jesus made of Himself on the cross, Mary cooperated in our Redemption, thereby acquiring an added claim to the title of Mother of The Church. 3. All the Graces which Jesus won for us by His death on the cross and which He applies to the members of His Church are distributed through her Maternal Intercession. *

WHY IS MARY CALLED : QUEEN OF HEAVEN AND EARTH ?

Certainly, in the full and strict meaning of the term, only Jesus Christ, the God-Man, is King; but Mary, too, as Mother of the Divine Christ, as His associate in the Redemption, in His struggle with His enemies and His final Victory over them, has a share, though in a limited analogous way, in His Royal Dignity. *

Mary’s role in The Church is inseparable from her union with Jesus Christ and flows directly from it. The Church rightly honors Mary with special devotion. This special devotion Differs essentially from the Adoration which is given to God The Son and equally to God The Father and God The Holy Spirit, and greatly fosters this Adoration.

In Mary, we contemplate what The Church already Is in her mystery on her own “pilgrimage of faith,” and what she will be in the Heavenly Homeland at the end of her journey. **

* Life In Christ In Accordance With The Catechism Of The Catholic Church

** Catechism Of The Catholic Church

You said, "James, if you remain a Catholic, you will NOT be saved!!! I will pray that God will open your eyes to the TRUTH of His word that you might be saved."

The 2000 year old Catholic Church possesses the Full and Complete means of salvation bestowed upon it by Jesus Christ! Therefore, I am in the Right Ship!

Since you are outside the ship, threading water, amidst the storm, deluded and zealously blaspheming to all that is Dear to the heart of Jesus Christ ~ His Mother, His Church, His Popes ~ I say, your salvation is in grave danger!

You say you are bible believing ~ you cannot even believe John 6 about the Holy Eucharist ~ the Very Basic doctrine of the early christians and the early church fathers :

From a treatise on the Lord’s Prayer by Saint Cyprian, Bishop and Martyr, A.D. 200-258 :

As the Lord’s Prayer continues, we ask : Give us this day our Daily Bread. We can understand this petition in a spiritual and in a Literal sense. For in the divine plan both senses may help toward our salvation. For Christ is the Bread of Life; this Bread does not belong to everyone, but is ours alone. When we say, Our Father, we understand that He is the Father of those who Know Him and Believe in Him. In the same way we speak of our Daily Bread, because Christ is the Bread of those who Touch His Body.

Now, we who Live in Christ and Receive His Eucharist, the Food of salvation, ask for this Bread to be given to us every day. Otherwise we may be forced to abstain from this Communion because of some serious sin. In this way we shall be separated from the Body of Christ, as He taught us in the words : I am the Bread of Life which has come down from Heaven. Anyone who Eats My Bread will Live for ever and the Bread that I will give is My Flesh for the Life of the world. Christ is saying, then, that anyone who Eats His Bread will Live forever. Clearly they Possess Life who Approach His Body and Share in the Eucharistic Communion. For this reason we should be apprehensive and pray that no one has to abstain from this Communion, lest he be separated from the Body of Christ and be far from salvation. Christ has Warned of this : If you do not Eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and Drink His Blood you will have no Life in you. We pray for our Daily Bread, Christ, to be given to us. With His help, we who Live and Abide in Him will never be separated from His Body and His Grace.

You pick and choose the bible verses that suit you. And with great arrogance, you interpret the bible and presume that your interpretation is right ~ without the backing of 2000 years of tried and tested Theology of the early church fathers and Successors of the Holy Apostles. You actually are So Wrong!



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 17, 2003.


Kevin,

If Mother Theresa is not a Catholic Christian ... there is no Catholic Christian! (Be careful what you say about her, she is right beside Virgin/Immaculate/Inviolate Jesus Christ and the Virgin/Immaculate/Inviolate Father and the Virgin/Immaculate/Inviolate Holy Spirit and the Blessed Perpetually Virgin Mary and Virgin St. Joseph and All the Holy Apostles (Mostly Virgins) and all the Saints and all the Virgin/Immaculate/Inviolate Angels ~ Right Now!)

What about St. Francis? St. Clare? St. Benedict? St. Dominic? St. Ignatius of Loyola? St. Ignatius of Antioch? St. Julian Eymard? and the list of Catholic Christian Saints goes on and on (Be careful what you say about them.)

Kevin, Heaven is FULL of Catholic Christians!!! and so is the earth, right now!

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 17, 2003.


Wow.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 17, 2003.

james,

You were way off, Kevin is not an Adventist, he is a member of the Church of Christ (demonination of)

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 17, 2003.


james,

If we are wrong, then we don't have anything to worry about. We will just spend more time in "purgatory" (if there really was such a thing). But if you are wrong about the Roman Church, you will be spending eternity in hell..

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 17, 2003.


David, your belief system depends on "Faith Alone". So, your own faith will put Catholics in Heaven because Catholics have faith plus all of the extras that you do not subscribe to. Once again, your logic is tilted, in this case; it is tilted in the Catholic's favor.

That logic is a real pain sometimes.

rod..

..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 17, 2003.


No, because Catholics do not believe in the Real Jesus. The Catholic Jesus is a peice of bread. My Jesus is not.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 17, 2003.

My Jesus does not allow Satan to sit with his children. "Stand behind me Satan". Get rid of Welp.

rod..

..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 17, 2003.


I do not tolerate satan worshippers.

rod a. rodriguez

..

..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 17, 2003.


David,

I am not way off regarding Kevin probably being a Seventh-Day Adventist ~ He Almost Is ~ the only difference is that he worships on Sunday ... but He Fits the Profile almost to the tee. Thank you for betraying your friend's Spots as being a member of the Protestant Church of Christ ~ that snake and False Prophet LIED when he said he did not belong to any denomination.

David, You have a lot of things to worry about! You may Not even make it to Purgatory ~ you are presuming Too Much ~ you are outside the Catholic Ship, threading water yourself, amidst the storm, surrounded by other sea snakes and sharks like yourself ~ outside the Catholic Church, you are in grave danger!

I am Right about the 2000 year old Roman Catholic Church ~ the ROCK ~ and the Countless Most Wise Theologians in the 2000 year history of the One and Only True Christian Church.

Today's 1 Billion Catholics are also Right.

You and Your Deluded church (filled with False prophets) deny the Real Presence of Jesus Christ ~ Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity ~ in the Holy Eucharist : You are a Heretic indeed!

Jesus Christ has warned of this : If You Do Not Eat The Flesh Of The Son Of Man And Drink His Blood You Will Have No Life In You. Whoever Eats My Flesh And Drinks My Blood Has Eternal Life, And I Will Raise Him On The Last Day (John 6:53-54) You wish this only has a symbolic meaning ~ but No, this is a Literal Sentence attested by all the Church Fathers.

-- james (elgreco@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.


My Jesus hates Half-truths.

Half-truths are personified in Heretics.

Satan is the father of Half-Truths.

Satan is the father of Heretics.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.


Heretics are the enemies of the Catholic Church (since the first century and up 'til now, right Kevin and David?)

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.

rod,

You wrote, "Yes, Kevin. Those who are dead know nothing. I agree. But, I don't think that we are talking about the physically dead; we are talking about the spiritually dead. We are referring to those who, after hearing the Word, refuse to accept the Word are "dead". Our Souls live forever and never die. There is a difference between eternal life and eternal suffering."

That is interesting because that is the first time I have heard you state "I don't think that we are talking about the physically dead; we are talking about the spiritually dead. "I thought we were talking about Martin Luther at least that is who you brought up when you said "If you maintain that your Bible is complete and correct, but you deny the works of Martin Luther, you are in error." Who is this "We are referring to" that you speak of??? I never mentioned there not being a difference between eternal life and eternal suffering.

You wrote, "My question has been posed about the soul having to struggle with our earthly burdens of Salvation. If the souls in Heaven must intercede for us, do they perceive any suffering? If yes, than what is Heaven? Is Heaven no longer an eternity of bliss, or do the interceding souls have no sadness or remorse for our struggles? I know your answers to my questions, Kevin. But, who's theology is correct?"

If you "know" my answers to your questions then why do you continue to ask me since it is obvious that you do NOT accept what I have told you earlier concerning this subject? I have answered the "who's theology is correct?" question you have posed but it seems to me that you do NOT want to hear the answer that God has PLAINLY given in His word. One more thing, there are NO "souls in Heaven interceding for us" for there is ONLY one person who intercedes for us and that is Jesus Christ!!!

rod, we do NOT "receive life when we accept the Word" MORE than mental acceptance is needed. In order to be saved one MUST OBEY Jesus for this is EXACTLY what Hebrews 5:9 states. Someone can "accept the Word" and still NOT obey Jesus for this is EXACTLY what those who claim that one is saved by "faith only" are guilty of doing.

James,

You wrote, "I am in horror of all the Blasphemies that spewed out of your filthy mouth against the Catholic Church, against the Blessed VIRGIN, VIRGIN, VIRGIN, PERPETUALLY VIRGIN Mary, against St. Peter and His Successors ~ the Popes, etc.!!! May God forgive you!"

Well now that you have made an accusation (once again) that I am guilty of Blaspheming, (once again) I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVE IT!!! Please show from the Word of God how I am guilty of this charge!!!!

I already told you in an earlier post what church I am a member of. Do you bother to read what I wrote?? Church History has NOTHING to do with which church is the TRUE church!!!!

I wrote, "Yes, I am "Anti-Catholic" because there is NO such thing as a Catholic-Christian."

To which you replied, "Which planet are you from? There are 1 Billion Catholic Christians worldwide as of 2003! ~ all Continents! all Countries! (just as Jesus said that His Church will go to the ends of the earth! Also, when Christ said that the mustard seed will grow into a big tree where birds will nests ~ that's the Catholic Church indeed!"

Jesus said in Matthew 7:13-14, "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are MANY WHO GO IN BY IT. (Catholics and those in Denominations). Because NARROW IS THE GATE and DIFFICULT IS THE WAY WHICH LEADS TO LIFE, and there are FEW WHO FIND IT. (Those who have OBEYED the Gospel)." A Catholic CANNOT be a Christian, because they have NOT obeyed the gospel. The gospel is God's POWER to salvation (Rom. 1:16) and NOT the Catholic Church as you have been DUPED into believing. Catholics CLAIM that they love God, but they do NOT do what He says!!!

You wrote, "Holy Mary is a Perpetual Virgin! This is Divine Revelation revealed to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church."

This is another LIE that you have been DUPED into believing. Mary was NOT a "Perpetual Virgin" as you FALSELY state. Is this the ONLY answer that you can come up with, "This is Divine Revelation revealed to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church."???

I PROVED from the Word of God how you are NOT telling the TRUTH and I CHALLENGE you once again to PROVE ME WRONG. God will hold you accountable James for choosing to believe what MAN says instead of what He has stated CLEARLY in His Word concerning this subject.

You wrote, "This is the Revelation of the Holy Spirit to the Catholic Church who loves Mary because Mary is the Mother of the Church."

Mary is NOT the "Mother of the Church". She may be the Mother of the Catholic Church, but I can guarantee you that she is NOT the mother of the church that Jesus built!!! Jesus said He would build HIS CHURCH (Matt. 16:18) and that is EXACTLY what He did when 3,000 souls were added on the day of Pentecost. (Acts 2:41). It is interesting to note that in the first gospel sermon that Peter preached, there was NO mention of this so called "Mother of the Church" now was there??? You can search far and wide in the Bible and you will NOT find the ignorant claim that Mary is the "Mother of the Church".

You wrote, "You better pray the Act of Reparation for the Blasphemies Against the Blessed Virgin Mary ~ with great zeal, you deny her Perpetual Virginity and you deny her Assumption and you deny her Queenship! (You are on the Blessed Virgin Mary's Red List)."

First, there is NO SUCH THING as praying for an Act of Reparation this must be another invention of the Catholic Church.

Second, If the dead do NOT know anything that is happening on the earth for God SPECIFICALLY stated in Ecclesiastes 9:5, "But the dead know nothing," I CANNOT be on Mary's Red List if since she does not even know what I am doing here on earth!!!

Third, once again there is SILENCE from your end on PROVING from the Word of God that Mary is the Queen of Heaven.

You wrote, "The Pope is the highest Holy Priest on earth after Jesus Christ ascended. St. Peter is the first Pope. The Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals. Popes hold the chair and Authority of St. Peter to whom Jesus Christ gave the Keys and appointed the Head of His Church. How dare you malign the office of the Pope! (You are on St. Peter's Red List).

Please notice forum readers how James does NOT even bother to PROVE from the Word of God that there is such an office as that of the Pope. What James FAILS to tell you is that ALL of the Apostles had the authority to "bind and loose" (just as Peter did). (See Matt. 18:18). To claim that a man (the Pope) has the ability to be "infallible in matters of faith and morals" is the TRUE BLASPHEMY. The ONLY one who is "infallible" is GOD!!! The Pope once again tries to USURP the AUTHORITY of God by claiming that he instead of God is "infallible". How dare you INSULT GOD!!!

You wrote, "The Catholic Church does not break the Fourth Commandment nor any Commandment but upholds All the Commandments. Please explain further your accusation that the Catholic Church breaks the Fourth Commandment. How does the Catholic Church do that?"

I SPECIFICALLY told you in an earlier post how the Catholic Church is GUILTY of BREAKING the Fourth Commandment. The FOURTH Commandment states, "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it." (Ex. 20:8-11).

Please tell everyone here James why CATHOLICS do NOT obey this COMMANDMENT??? You (as a Catholic) claim to UPHOLD IT, so why do you BREAK IT and NOT OBSERVE IT???

Catholics do NOT observe the Fourth Commandment for they WORK On the Sabbath day NOR are Catholics COMMANDED by the Pope to observe the Sabbath day. Since this is TRUE, the Catholic Church DOES BREAK the Fourth Commandment.

You wrote, "The 2000 year old Catholic Church possesses the Full and Complete means of salvation bestowed upon it by Jesus Christ! Therefore, I am in the Right Ship!"

This is what you have been DUPED into believing!!! Catholics do NOT obey the gospel, so they will be lost. Go back and re-read 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9. We will be judged by what is WRITTEN. (John 12:48). To claim that one can be saved OUTSIDE of what is WRITTEN as Catholics claim in that they hold tradition to be equal to the Word of God is just NOT TRUE. Catholic tradition NOR the Pope will be able to save you on judgment day James.

You wrote, "Since you are outside the ship, threading water, amidst the storm, deluded and zealously blaspheming to all that is Dear to the heart of Jesus Christ ~ His Mother, His Church, His Popes ~ I say, your salvation is in grave danger!"

If I am deluded and blaspheming as you FALSELY CHARGE once again, I challenge you to PROVE from the Word of God how I am guilty of this very thing!!! Neither Mary, Nor the Catholic Church, Nor the Pope will be able to save you!!! I have showed you from the Word of God how it is YOU who are in danger of being lost and yet you continue to state that my salvation is in great danger with NO proof offered. Who can believe it???

You wrote, "You say you are bible believing ~ you cannot even believe John 6 about the Holy Eucharist ~ the Very Basic doctrine of the early christians and the early church fathers"

The doctrine of the Eucharist that the Body and Blood of Jesus LITERALLY and miraculously manifests into one wafer is another ABSURD invention of the Catholic Church. God PLAINLY states that we Gentiles are to abstain from Blood. (Acts 15:29).

If my interpretation of the Bible is not correct, then I would like to suggest that get busy correcting me!!! If my interpretation is wrong, then PROVE IT!!!

You wrote, "If Mother Theresa is not a Catholic Christian ... there is no Catholic Christian!

MY POINT EXACTLY!!! There are NO CATHOLIC CHRISTIANS!!!!!

Catholics burned Heretics and violated 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 right James!!!

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 18, 2003.


James,

Sorry, I did NOT lie for I am NOT a Protestant, NOR am I a member of any denomination.

David is the one who has not told you the truth. We have been over this ground before right David???

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 18, 2003.


James,

One more thing, I NEVER claimed to be a Prophet now did I. So once again you make a FALSE ACCUSATION stating that I am a "false prophet".

Catholics are good at making accusations, but they NEVER bother to PROVE IT!!!

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 18, 2003.


Kevin-You introduced some Scriptures and interesting points to discuss. I was merely answering to those points. Also, whenever Luther is brought up, inevitable, doctrine and theology differences or issue will be discussed in the same breath. I have read everything that you have submitted. I must continue to weigh the meanings very carefully with everything I've been taught and everything that I am learning. When I thoughout opinions, interpretations, or argument, they are meant for discussion and discussions only.

I brought up your name with my neighbor and I discussed the Church of Christ with him. It turns out that he too is a Church of Christ member. His church is just a few blocks from our houses. No, I didn't get into a street fight with him over theology or doctrine. It was a very pleasant conversation. The main reason that I could understand his stance was through your "ministry" on this forum. I'm not gonna fight you, Kevin. But, I will ask hard hitting questions for both of our benefit. Some of the best travelled trails are two way roads.

ro

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 18, 2003.


To Kevin, [Name calling deleted by Moderator](Just Remember that Satan is A Staunch Enemy of the Holy Catholic Church!), To Kevin, [Name calling deleted by Moderator], To Kevin, [Name calling deleted by Moderator],

The Holy Roman Catholic Church is the True Church of Jesus Christ ~ the Church which the Lord Jesus Christ Himself founded upon Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, and which He promised to be with until the End of Time and against which "the gates of Hell" would not prevail. She is the Holy Church which continues to promulgate the selfsame Gospel of Jesus Christ since Our Divine Master ascended into Heaven.

Catholics believe that theirs is the one true Church of Jesus Christ, firstly, because theirs is the only Christian Church that goes back in history to the time of Christ; secondly, because theirs is the only Christian Church which possesses the invincible UNITY, the intrinsic HOLINESS, the continual UNIVERSALITY and the indisputable Apostolicity which Christ said would distinguish His True Church, all professed membership in in this same Catholic Church. Wrote Ignatius of Antioch, illustrious Church Father of the first century: "Where the Bishop is, there let the multitude of believers be; even as

where Jesus is, there is the Catholic Church."

Our Lord said: "There shall be one fold and one shepherd, yet

it is well known that the (thousands and thousands and thousands of) Protestant Denominations Cannot agree on what Christ actually taught. Since

Christ roundly condemned interdenominationalism (And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand." ~ Mark 3:25), Catholics cannot believe that He would ever sanction it in His Church.

~ says Paul Whitcomb, Your Former Protestant Minister, Now A Catholic

You Said, "I am NOT a Protestant, NOR am I a member of any denomination."

How bogus! You are a [Name calling deleted by Moderator] Against the Catholic Church ~ that is what you are!

You are a [Name calling deleted by Moderator] of the bible ~ just like your Heretical Father ~ Martin Luther ~ A Staunch Enemy of the Catholic Church.

You are a [Name calling deleted by Moderator] because you spread your false teachings to other people. You are a [Name calling deleted by Moderator].

You are a [Name calling deleted by Moderator] because you proclaim lies about those whom Jesus loves ~ His Holy Mother, His Holy Catholic Church, His Holy Apostles, His Holy Saints, etc.

You cannot even give a history of your church ~ how Ignorant you are of the church you go to. You belong to a church that Spoofed recently ~ a church that is against the seat and office of St. Peter, a church who maligns the Blessed Virgin Mary, a church who spread False Teachings. You woke up one morning, picked up a bible, and started misinterpreting it. Then you spread lies and false teachings.

You lied when you said, "A Catholic CANNOT be a Christian, because they have NOT obeyed the gospel." Catholics obey the Gospel ~ Mother Teresa and St. Francis and Pope John Paul II are excellent examples.

You are unbelievable when you denied Christianity to Mother Theresa.

You lied when you said, "Mary was NOT a "Perpetual Virgin"

You obviously did not read the catechism about her virginity, before, during, and after Jesus was born.

The Catholic Church has Authority Over the Holy Bible. You are not the private interpreter of the bible. The Magisterium of the Catholic Church is the Only True Interpreter of the Bible.

You lied about the Blessed Virgin Mary. She was present with St. Peter and the Holy Apostles during Pentecost. It was because of her Intercession that the 3000 souls were added to the Holy Catholic Church.

Catholic Logic: Jesus is the Church. Mary is the Mother of Jesus. Therefore, Mary is the Mother of the Church.

You better pray the Act of Reparation for Blasphemies Against the Blessed Virgin Mary ~ your soul is almost igniting into fire.

You lied when you said that Mary is dead.

The Blessed Virgin Mary is right beside the Most Holy Trinity Right Now in Heaven with all the Holy Angels and all the Holy Saints from the Holy Catholic Church!

Catholic Logic: Jesus is King. Mary is the Church. Jesus is the Spouse of the Church. Mary is Queen.

Many things were revealed to the Successors of the Holy Apostles of Catholic Church from which you will never learn by your solitary Misinterpretation of the Bible!

The word "Pope" doesn't appear in the Bible ~ but then neither do the words "Trinity," "Incarnation," "Ascension," and "Bible" appear in the Bible.

However, they are refered to by other names. The Bible, for example, is referred to as "Scripture." The Pope, which means head bishop of the Church, is referred to as "Rock" of the Church. Christ used that terminology when He appointed the Apostle Peter the first head bishop of His Church, saying: "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona ... Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church." (Matthew 16:17- 19). "There shall be one fold and one shepherd."(John 10:16. "Feed my lambs ... feed my sheep." (John 21:16-17) The words "rock" and "shepherd" must apply to Peter, and they must distinguish him as the head Apostle, otherwise Christ's statements are so ambiguous as to be meaningless.

Certainly, the other Apostles understood that Peter had Authority from Christ to lead the Catholic Church for they gave him the presiding place every time they assembled in Catholic Council (Acts 1:15, 5:1-10), and they placed his name first every time they listed the names of the Catholic Apostles. (Matthew 10:2, Mark 3:16, Luke 6:13-14, Acts 1:13)

In Addition, there is the testimony of the Church Fathers. In the Second Century St. Hegessipus compiled a list of Popes to the time of Anicetus (eleventh Pope) which contained the name fo St. Peter as first. Early in the third century the historian Caius wrote that Pope Victor was "the thirteenth Bishop of Rome from Peter." In the middle of third century St. Cyprian related that Cornelius (twenty- first Pope) "mounted the lofty summit of the priesthood... the place of Peter."

Even Protestant historians have attested to Peter's role as first Bishop of Rome, first Pope of the Catholic Church. Wrote the eminent Protestant historian Cave in his Historia Literaria : "That Peter was at Rome, and held the See there fore some time, we fearlessly affirm with the whole multitude of the ancients." Hence the source of the Pope's Authority to rule over the Catholic Church is quite obvious: It was given him by none other than Jesus Christ ~ by God Himself.

~ says Paul Whitcomb, an ex-Protestant, now a Dedicated Catholic (Kevin, You should follow his example and ex-Protestant logic.)

You lied when you said, "Catholics do NOT observe the Fourth Commandment for they WORK On the Sabbath day NOR are Catholics COMMANDED by the Pope to observe the Sabbath day. Since this is TRUE, the Catholic Church DOES BREAK the Fourth Commandment. "

Your numbering of the Ten Commandments is Wrong ~ that's because you are using an incomplete bible and misinterpreting it.

According to the early Christians the THIRD Commandment says, "Remember to keep holy the Sabbath Day." Catholics do not break the Sabbath Day. The New Testament Sabbath Day is Sunday ~ Catholics are obliged to go to Mass on Sunday. For those who have to work ~ firemen, policemen, doctors, nurses, etc.~ they are given dispensation because they are doing Good for the society. Even Jesus Himself worked on the Sabbath and did Good on the Sabbath because He is Lord of the Sabbath. It is Christian to do Good on Sunday. For those who are not working for society, Sunday is a day of Rest.

On Judgment Day, you will have to account for all the Lies that you Spread and Blasphemies that came out of your Filthy Mouth. You will have to face the Immaculate Blessed Perpetually Virgin Mary, the Queen of Heaven and St. Peter, the First Pope.

Jesus Christ is the enemy of those who malign and Blaspheme His Living Mother, His Precious Catholic Church, His Beloved Popes especially Pope John Paul II.

The Catholic Church who wrote and identified and assembled and interpreted the Holy Bible is my Infallible Guide to Salvation.

You Misinterpretion of the Holy Bible has put your salvation in grave danger. (Satan is really making good use of you.)

This is a Great Misinterpretation of yours, "The doctrine of the Eucharist that the Body and Blood of Jesus LITERALLY and miraculously manifests into one wafer is another ABSURD invention of the Catholic Church. God PLAINLY states that we Gentiles are to abstain from Blood. (Acts 15:29)."

The Holy Eucharist was instituted by Jesus Himself during the Last Supper. Get a grip!

You look like you are a Hopeless Case of Heresy and Delusion. (but St. Paul, Jewish pre-Catholic, after murdering Catholics, became a Catholic Himself and wrote the Epistles, but you are not St. Paul.)

You live a life of ERROR.

The Catholic Church is Noah's Ark ~ you, Kevin, are outside in the Great Flood!

Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of Angels, pray for us. Blessed Virgin Mary, Holy Mother of God, pray for us. Blessed Virgin Mary, Ark of the Covenant, pray for us. In the Name of Jesus Christ Our Lord. Amen.



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.


rod,

It is not my intention to "fight you" or anyone else here on this forum. My intention is to get people to STUDY God's word and come to their OWN conclusions without all of the ERROR so prevalent in the denominational world with all of their Creeds and the ERROR that is also prevalent in the Catholic Church with its Catechism. There is ONE BODY (See Eph. 4:4 which is the church) and there is ONE Spirit (See Eph 4:4), there is ONE Hope (See Eph. 4:4), there is ONE Lord (See Eph. 4:5), there is ONE Faith (See Eph. 4:5), there is ONE Baptism (See Eph. 4:5) and there is ONE God and Father of all. (See Eph. 4:6).

We are admonished to RIGHTLY DIVIDE the Word of Truth. (See 2 Tim. 2:15). To claim that one CANNOT understand the Word of God without an interpreter (as the Catholic Church FALSELY asserts) is NOT what God says. Catholics do NOT "rightly divide" the Word of Truth for they TELL YOU WHAT TO BELIEVE for their members CANNOT have a private interpretation of Scripture. All members of Denominations do NOT "rightly divide" the Word of Truth for they tell everyone that salvation is by "faith only" and that is NOT what the Scriptures teach.

Jesus is the "author of eternal salvation to all who OBEY HIM" (See Heb. 5:9). Catholics DENY this verse as they teach that one must "obey the Church" and those in Denominations also DENY this verse for they teach that one does "NOT have to obey Jesus" they only have believe in Him to be saved.

rod, the gospel is God's power to salvation (See Rom. 1:16) and those who do NOT obey the gospel will be LOST. (See 2 Thes. 1:7-9). If you are sincerely seeking the truth, then you will let go of those errors that you have been taught that are NOT in accordance with God's word.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 18, 2003.


Rod, A Catholic Christian,

The Catholic Church is Noah's Ark ~ You Are INSIDE the Ark! Outside is the Great Flood.

God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, Blessed Virgin Mary, St. Joseph, All you Holy Angels and All you Holy Saints, Bless Rod, Keep him and protect him from the lies of the enemy. Keep him in the Truth of your Holy Catholic Church. Thank you Holy Heaven. In the Name of Jesus Christ Our Lord. Amen.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.


Hi James and Kevin.

If I were to die today...

I hope that at least these things are at my death bed:

1. My family.
2. My faith in Jesus Christ as my Saviour.
3. A priest.
4. Jesus and His Angels.

Does this make me errant in my faith? I hope not. I was born a Catholic and in-between my birth and death there was a tremendous storm. The Catholic Church may not take me back unless I release the ropes that entangle me. But, I do know that in my heart I shall die a Catholic, even if I am just "standing in the doorway".

I keep a picture over my desk. It is a photograph of me celebrating my first Holy Communion. There never was any doubt of doctrine or theology back then when I was eight. My faith was pure. Could it be that we can return to such a time of purity?

rod..

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 18, 2003.


Kevin, [Name calling deleted by Moderator], (Let us not forget, Satan has been a Staunch Enemy of the 2000 year old Holy Catholic Church of Jesus Christ.)

The Catholic Church promotes Bible reading.

Popes have issued pastoral letters to the whole Catholic Church, called encyclicals, on the edifying effects of Bible reading.

The Catholic Bible far outsells all other Bibles worldwide, as always.

The very first Bible was produced by the Catholic Church ~ compiled by the Catholic scholars of the 2nd and 3rd Century and approved for general Catholic use by the Catholic Councils of Hippo, 393 A.D. and Carthage, 397 A.D.

The very first printed Bible was produced under the auspices of the Catholic Church ~ printed by the Catholic inventor of the printing press, Johannes Guttenberg.

The first Bible with Chapters and numbered verses was produced by the Catholic Church ~ the work of Stephen Langton, Catholic Cardinal Archbishop of Canterbury.

This perennial Catholic devotion to the Bible prompted Martin Luther ~ who certainly cannot be accused of Catholic favouritism ~ to write in his Commentary of St. John : "We are compelled to concede to the Catholic Papists that they have the Word of God, that we received it from them, and that without them we should have no knowledge of it at all."

~ says Paul Whitcomb, an ex-Protestant Minister, Now a Catholic

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.


To Rod, A Catholic Christian, To Rod, Most Beloved by the Holy Catholic Church, Most Beloved by Jesus Christ, Most Beloved by the Blessed Virgin Mary, Most Beloved by St. Joseph, Most Beloved by All the Holy Angels, Most Beloved by All the Holy Saints,

Peace be with you in the Name of Jesus Christ Our Lord.

I can relate to your tremendous storm for I also had a tremendous storm. Storms are a Mystery. God usually use storms for a higher purpose. Even Jesus had a tremendous storm. We have to drink in obedience the cup God gives to us. We have to unite our sufferings with the sufferings of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ~ only then will we feel the yoke made lighter for us with His help.

Do not despair. God is Merciful. You will feel better after Confession. You are sure to have Forgiveness. Just pour out your heart to the Holy Priest, who is tangibly Acting in the place of Jesus Christ, in the Confessional Box. Also, make an appointment with a Holy Priest, who is tangibly Acting in the place of Jesus Christ, so that you can have spiritual direction. Go soon, do not postpone, and receive God's Mercy, Reassurance, and Tangible Support.

We desperately need a priest during our dying hour because he can give us the Sacrament of the Annointing of the Sick, Confession, Communion, and a Plenary Indulgence!

St. Joseph died a Happy death because when he died, He had Jesus Christ, the Son of God, on his Right and the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, on his left.

May you have the Most Holy Trinity, the Most Holy Family, Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, All the Holy Angels, and All the Holy Saints, with you now and at the hour of your death. May your family be with you always. Thank you Holy Heaven. In the Name of Jesus Christ Our Lord. Amen.

With the Help of the Holy Catholic Church ~ no matter how difficult ~ you can release the ropes that entangle you. The Holy Catholic Church has all the Sacraments ~ Confession renews your Baptism every single time you confess ~ has all the Sacramentals (Catholic Weaponry) ~ Holy Water, Holy Salt, Holy Oil, Scapulars, Crucifixes, Medals, Cords, etc.

let us not forget the Most Powerful Holy Eucharist ~ the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ Himself ~ this is the Most Powerful untangler! ~ a Solution to Any Problem!

Persevere to go to Daily Mass.

Of course, the Catholic Bible is a daily nourishment as well.

Surely, we can return to such time of purity ...

every time we go to confession ~ though our sins were as scarlet, we have become White as Snow! ~ a fresh Baptism!

The Catholic Church is Noah's Ark ~ YOU ARE INSIDE THE ARK ~ Outside is the Great Flood!

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.


To Rod, a Catholic Christian, To Rod, Most Beloved by the Blessed Virgin Mary,

CONFESSION HELPS US ...

The urge to confess is natural to us humans. Sorrow or shame is lessened when shared with another.

Confession makes us conscious of our sinfulness. It forces us to think of our sins. We cannot bury them and forget about them. We have to face them time and time again. This has the effect of making us conscious of them and Helping us to Overcome them and to realize how weak we are and how Merciful God is.

People need Reassurance that God has actually forgiven them. Sinners are not as apt to have this Reassurance if they merely say in their hearts, “I am sorry.” When Jesus forgave sins he Announced the Fact, in order that the sinner would know for sure that he or she was forgiven. In the parable of the prodigal son, the younger son was sorry for sins. But he knew he had to go to his Father and personally admit his guilt. Notice how the Father Blessed the repentant son for doing so (Luke 15:11-31).

~ Life in Christ In Accordance With the Catechism of the Catholic Church

CONFESSION RESTORES US ...

Sin is before all else an offense against God, a rupture of communion with Him. At the same time it damages communion with The Church. For this reason Conversion entails both God’s forgiveness And reconciliation with The Church, which are expressed and accomplished liturgically by the Sacrament of Confession / Penance / Reconciliation.

The whole Power of the Sacrament of Confession consists in restoring us to God’s Grace and joining us with Him in an Intimate Friendship. Reconciliation with God is thus the purpose and effect of this sacrament. For those who receive the Sacrament of Penance with a contrite heart and religious disposition, reconciliation “is usually followed by Peace and Serenity of Conscience with Strong Spiritual Consolation.

The Sacrament of Reconciliation with God brings about a True Spiritual Resurrection, restoration of the Dignity & Blessings of the life of the Children of God, of which the most precious is Friendship with God.

COFESSION RECONCILES US ...

This sacrament reconciles us with The Church. Sin damages or even breaks fraternal communion. The Sacrament of Confession repairs or restores it. In this sense it does not simply Heal the one restored to ecclesial communion, but has also a Revitalizing effect on the life of The Church which suffered from the sin of one of her members. Re- established or Strengthened in the communion of saints, the sinner is made Stronger by the exchange of spiritual goods among all the living members of the Body of Christ, whether still on pilgrimage or already in Heavenly Homeland :

It must be recalled that this reconciliation with God leads to other reconciliations which repair the other breaches caused by sin.

The forgiven penitent is reconciled with himself in his inmost being, where he regains his innermost Truth. He is reconciled with his brethren whom he has in some way offended and wounded. He is reconciled with The Church. He is reconciled with All Creation.

In this sacrament, the sinner, placing himself before the Merciful judgment of God, anticipates in a certain way the judgment to which he will be subjected at the end of his earthly life. For it is now, in this life, that we are offered the Choice between life and death, and it is only by the road of Conversion that we can enter the Kingdom, from which one is excluded by grave sin. In converting to Christ through Penance and Faith, the sinner passes from death to life and “does not come into judgement.” ~ Catechism of the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church is Noah's Ark ~ Rod, YOU ARE INSIDE THE ARK ~ Outside is the Great Flood!

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.


I'm reading your reply very intensly.

Thank you, James.

rod..

..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 18, 2003.


James,

You wrote, "To Kevin, A Staunch Enemy of the Holy Catholic Church (Just Remember that Satan is A Staunch Enemy of the Holy Catholic Church!), To Kevin, A Self-proclaimed Misinterpreter of the Bible, To Kevin, A Blasphemer Against the Holy Catholic Church, Blasphemer Against the Blessed Virgin Mary, Blasphemer Against The Sacred Teachings of The Holy Catholic Church, Blasphemer Against Holy Mother Theresa and All the Holy Saints,"

Yea, and I bet if the Catholic Church still had the ability to burn heretics at the stake, I am sure that I would be first on your list wouldn?t I James? Remember, Satan was given the ability to make war with the Saints and to overcome them and that is EXACTLY what the Catholic Church is guilty of doing when they BURNED those who did not agree with their FALSE DOCTRINE. If I am a "Misinterpreter of the Bible", you most assuredly have NOT proven this to be the case now have you James?

You wrote, "The Holy Roman Catholic Church is the True Church of Jesus Christ ~ the Church which the Lord Jesus Christ Himself founded upon Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, and which He promised to be with until the End of Time and against which "the gates of Hell" would not prevail. She is the Holy Church which continues to promulgate the selfsame Gospel of Jesus Christ since Our Divine Master ascended into Heaven."

NOT!!! It is simply amazing that the Catholic Church claims that the Church was built on Peter and they get this ABSURD notion from ONE spurious passage that does NOT even teach anything remotely that the church was built on Peter. The passage in question TEACHES that the church was built on the CONFESSION that Peter made that JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD. Catholics teach a LIE that the church is built on Peter because that is NOT even remotely the case at all!!! Jesus is the HEAD of the church and NOT Peter. (Colossians 1:18). The gates of Hades (Hell) did NOT prevail against Jesus from building His church BECAUSE He ROSE FROM THE DEAD!!! Jesus IS with us until the end of time because the Holy Spirit has ALREADY given us ALL THINGS that pertain to LIFE and GODLINESS. (See 2 Peter 1:3). Catholics DO NOT teach the gospel of Jesus Christ for they FALSELY claim that infants can be saved. If FAITH comes by Hearing and Hearing by the Word of God (Romans 10:17), then infants CANNOT HAVE FAITH for it is IMPOSSIBLE for an infant to believe in Jesus.

You wrote, Catholics believe that theirs is the one true Church of Jesus Christ, firstly, because theirs is the only Christian Church that goes back in history to the time of Christ;"

Just because a Church can trace its roots back to the first century is NO indication NOR is it PROOF that it is the TRUE Church of Christ. In the First Century church there was NO SUCH THING as one Elder (Bishop) over the church. You can search far and wide in the NT and you will NOT find one Elder (Bishop) over a church but a plurality of Elders (Bishops) in each congregation.

You wrote, "secondly, because theirs is the only Christian Church which possesses the invincible UNITY, the intrinsic HOLINESS, the continual UNIVERSALITY and the indisputable Apostolicity which Christ said would distinguish His True Church, all professed membership in in this same Catholic Church."

Catholic officials would like everyone to believe that the Catholic Church has UNITY, whereas those who hold to the Bible alone, have utter division.

The TRUTH of the matter is that the Catholic Church is the mother of division. Every major division that is in Christianity originated with and came out of the Catholic Church. Approximately 1050 A.D., the Catholic Church split and there was the great schism between the West and the East. A few hundred years later, there was a split and the Anglican Church was started. It CLAIMED to honor many of the very same bishops and trace its lineage back to the apostles over much the same route. A division occurred in Catholicism when the Lutheran Church broke away; it was another branch or division within Catholicism. The bulk of Protestant denominations today are branches and sects of groups which originally broke away from the Roman Catholic Church. The DISRESPECT that the Catholic Church has toward the Bible is the PRIME CAUSE of division in the Religious world. Such charges lead men away from the Bible and cause them to distrust it as the only rule of faith. Holding to the Bible alone does NOT cause division, but to the contrary, is the only true means of unity.

The solution for overcoming division among us is to reject all the unscriptural practices which have been introduced by men and go back to the Bible. We must completely denounce all the creeds, catechisms, decrees, doctrines, and traditions of men and fully return to the WRITTEN word of Christ, the New Testament. This is the ONLY WAY to please God and to be UNITED in His name.

I wrote, "I am NOT a Protestant, NOR am I a member of any denomination."

To which you replied, "How bogus! You are a Heretic Against the Catholic Church ~ that is what you are!"

Since you CANNOT prove me wrong, the ONLY thing that you can say is "How bogus" and then once again claim that I am a "Heretic Against the Catholic Church". Tsk, Tsk?Do you still want to burn me at the stake? LOL!!!

You wrote, "You are a self-Misinterpreter of the bible ~ just like your Heretical Father ~ Martin Luther ~ A Staunch Enemy of the Catholic Church."

You have yet to PROVE that I am a "self-Misinterpreter of the bible"!!! Making an assertion without proof is equal to NOT saying anything at all!!! Sorry, Martin Luther is NOT my Father for he believed that one can be saved by "faith only" and that is NOT what the Bible teaches.

You wrote, "You are a false prophet because you spread your false teachings to other people. You are a Deluded Heretic."

You have YET to PROVE that I am spreading false teachings have you James??? If I am teaching error, then once again I would like to suggest that you get busy and CORRECT my errors. If I am a false teacher PROVE IT from the Word of God that I am guilty of such!!! If you can convince me of my error, then I will become a Catholic, If I can convince you that you are wrong are you willing to do the same???

You wrote, "You are a blasphemer because you proclaim lies about those whom Jesus loves ~ His Holy Mother, His Holy Catholic Church, His Holy Apostles, His Holy Saints, etc."

No James, I did not "proclaim lies" as you FALSELY ASSERT, I told you the TRUTH about what God has PLAINLY stated in His Word and you choose to REJECT what God has said.

You wrote, "You cannot even give a history of your church ~ how Ignorant you are of the church you go to."

I do NOT need to give the History of my church because it does NOT matter. The History of my church is located in the pages of the New Testament.

You wrote, "You belong to a church that Spoofed recently ~ a church that is against the seat and office of St. Peter, a church who maligns the Blessed Virgin Mary, a church who spread False Teachings. You woke up one morning, picked up a bible, and started misinterpreting it. Then you spread lies and false teachings."

Once again I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVE IT!!! If I have maligned Mary, please show everyone here from the Word of God how I am guilty of such?

You wrote, "You lied when you said, "A Catholic CANNOT be a Christian, because they have NOT obeyed the gospel." Catholics obey the Gospel ~ Mother Teresa and St. Francis and Pope John Paul II are excellent examples."

No James, I did NOT lie but spoke the truth. Catholics do NOT obey the gospel so they are NOT Christians. If Catholics obey the gospel as you assert (you are very good at making assertions) then PROVE IT. Please show me from the Word of God how they obeyed the gospel?

You wrote, "You are unbelievable when you denied Christianity to Mother Theresa."

Not "unbelievable", but I speak the TRUTH.

You wrote, "You lied when you said, "Mary was NOT a "Perpetual Virgin" You obviously did not read the catechism about her virginity, before, during, and after Jesus was born."

No James I did NOT lie as you FALSELY ASSERT, but I spoke the TRUTH once again EXACTLY as the Word of God states. You obviously have NOT read your Bible now have you James??? If you would have read my replies to your false beliefs concerning Mary, and checked them in your own Bible, you would PLAINLY see that I am telling the TRUTH.

You wrote, "The Catholic Church has Authority Over the Holy Bible. You are not the private interpreter of the bible. The Magisterium of the Catholic Church is the Only True Interpreter of the Bible."

Please provide me a passage in the Bible that states that someone else [the Catholic Church] must interpret the Bible for me? God does NOT demand that some outside source or agency (man or the Church) is required to interpret the Bible correctly. If so, then you ought to be able to provide book, chapter and verse where God says that an individual CANNOT interpret what they read. I do NOT assume anything, I KNOW my interpretation is CORRECT because it AGREES EXACTLY with the word of God teaches. God PLAINLY states that "God looks down from heaven upon the children of men, To see if there are any who understand, who seek God." (Psalm 53:2). He also said in Ephesians 5:17, "Therefore do not be unwise, but understand what the will of the Lord is."

The reason God gave gifts to men when the Holy Spirit came is spelled out in Ephesians 4:12 "for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ,"

For this reason in verse 13, "till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ;"

Since we have the PERFECT WRITTEN testament of God, (1 Corinthians 13:10), we CAN KNOW what the TRUTH is because this PERFECT LAW OF LIBERTY (James 2:12) [which is the NT] is what we will be judged by when Jesus returns. This is the reason we have the WRITTEN word of God for the Apostle Paul said in Ephesians 4:14, "that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting,"

Those who UNDERSTAND the Word of God and OBEY will be saved. (Matt 13:23, Mark 4:20, Luke 8:15).

You wrote, "You lied about the Blessed Virgin Mary. She was present with St. Peter and the Holy Apostles during Pentecost. It was because of her Intercession that the 3000 souls were added to the Holy Catholic Church."

This is truly an IGNORANT claim that "It was because of her Intercession that the 3000 souls were added to the Holy Catholic Church". My Bible most assuredly does NOT state this as a fact and I am POSITIVE that your Catholic Bible does NOT either. Peter preached a sermon and those who were "pricked in their hearts" and were "baptized FOR the remission of their sins" were those who were saved. Who is the one guilty of LYING now James???

You wrote, "Catholic Logic: Jesus is the Church. Mary is the Mother of Jesus. Therefore, Mary is the Mother of the Church."

Mary may be the Mother of the Catholic Church, but I can ASSURE YOU that she is NOT the Mother of the church in which Jesus built. Jesus NEVER said "I will build my church for you Mother" NOR is the name of Mary EVER mentioned as being a PILLAR in the church. Your Catholic Logic is NOT in accordance with the WRITTEN Word of God.

You wrote, "You better pray the Act of Reparation for Blasphemies Against the Blessed Virgin Mary ~ your soul is almost igniting into fire."

Sorry, there is NO mention of this in the Bible. WRONG AGAIN James!!!

You wrote, "You lied when you said that Mary is dead. The Blessed Virgin Mary is right beside the Most Holy Trinity Right Now in Heaven with all the Holy Angels and all the Holy Saints from the Holy Catholic Church!"

Ha!!! You could NOT prove this if your life depended on it!!! God said in 1 John 4:12, "No one has seen God at any time." Once again James you do NOT know what you are talking about!!!

You wrote, "Catholic Logic: Jesus is King. Mary is the Church. Jesus is the Spouse of the Church. Mary is Queen."

Your Catholic Logic is getting you NOWHERE fast because it is based on FAULTY ASSUMPTIONS!!! LOL!!! Mary CANNOT be the Queen of Heaven for she is NOT even in Heaven yet!!!

You wrote, "Many things were revealed to the Successors of the Holy Apostles of Catholic Church from which you will never learn by your solitary Misinterpretation of the Bible!"

There is NO such thing as a Successor to an Apostle. When it is proved that Peter was NOT a Pope, the whole structure of Catholicism FALLS, with the so-called "successors" of Peter. Catholicism has no true foundation. The doctrine of the supremacy of Peter, and that he had successors is CONTRADICTORY to the Lord's teaching and plan. Let me say a little more about apostolic succession and bring in the testimony of the apostle Peter himself. There are NO apostles in the church today, nor can there be apostles in the sense of the apostle Peter. Although Judas was replaced as an apostle, the idea of succession doesn't enter the picture. The very purpose and work of an apostle would make it IMPOSSIBLE for them to have successors today. Please notice. "In those days" after Jesus had ascended back to heaven Simon Peter stood up and addressed his fellow-disciples about the need of replacing Judas. Illustrating from the Psalms, he says, "Let another take his office." Then he gives the qualifications: "Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection" (Acts 1:15-22). Thus, apostles had to be witnesses and were Christ's official eyewitnesses of his resurrection from the dead. Their unique mission as eyewitnesses had been stressed before his crucifixion (John 15:26,27). Then again in Acts 1:8 Jesus said they would be witnesses. Throughout the early pages of the book of Acts this is continually mentioned. Notice Acts 2:32; 4:33; 5:29-32; 10:39-42; 13:31. The testimony of the apostle Peter is seen again in Acts 10:39-42, when he said, "We [the apostles] are witnesses..." These special witnesses are represented in this capacity again in Hebrews 2:3 and 4. It is very elementary to see that eyewitnesses can have no successors. When they die, they are gone. And there are no apostles, nor apostolic succession, in the church on earth today. These men have done their part in confirming the truth and getting the church started among men. Their writings, as well as that of other inspired men, constitute part of the New Testament Scriptures to guide us today.

You wrote, "Certainly, the other Apostles understood that Peter had Authority from Christ to lead the Catholic Church for they gave him the presiding place every time they assembled in Catholic Council (Acts 1:15, 5:1-10), and they placed his name first every time they listed the names of the Catholic Apostles. (Matthew 10:2, Mark 3:16, Luke 6:13-14, Acts 1:13)

No, that is WRONG again. The other Apostles did NOT understand that Peter had Authority NOR did they give him "the presiding place" every time they assembled. You do NOT speak the TRUTH on this subject for if this were the case then the Apostle James would NOT have JUDGED when they all met at the Jerusalem council to discuss the circumcision of the Gentiles in Acts chapter 15. The Apostle James PLAINLY stands up in verse 19 and states, "Therefore I judge". If Peter was the first Pope, he would have judged, NOT James. Peter did not fit the Papal pattern since he did not teach that he was the head of the church. Peter taught of only one "Chief Shepherd" (1 Peter 5:4), and that was Christ. Peter taught that the "stone" and "rock" upon which the church was built was not a man but Christ (1 Peter 2:6-8). This teaching agreed with the conversation that Jesus had with Peter (Matthew 16:15-19) where they were not talking about on which man to build the church, but the great question Jesus asked was, "Whom say ye that I am?" When Peter gave the correct answer, Jesus answered, "Upon this rock I will build my church." Peter was given the keys of the kingdom of heaven with the power of binding and loosing. This power was shared by the other apostles (Matthew 18:18; John 20:21-23). Since Peter did not consider himself the head of the church, he made no provision for anyone to succeed him. He said nothing about successors.

Peter did not fit the Papal pattern because the other apostles did not regard him as their superior. Paul said, "I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles" (2 Corinthians 11:5). And it was Paul who publicly rebuked Peter for his erroneous conduct (Galatians 2:11-14). Peter was referred to as one of the pillars of the church (Galatians 2:9). Note, Peter was ONE of the pillars, not head of all the churches. The church had been "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the chief corner stone" (Ephesians 2:20). The church was built on the "apostles," plural, not on one apostle. Although false teachers have attempted to build the church on Peter, "other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ" (1 Corinthians 3:11). Peter was one of the favorite three of the Lord-Peter, James, and John. He was impulsive and a natural leader. He was a beloved and faithful apostle. He was prominent but he was not pre-eminent.

Peter did not fit the Papal pattern because he was not in Rome. There is no Biblical evidence that he was ever in Rome. Paul wrote to the Roman Christians and saluted 27 persons (Romans 16:3-15) but did not mention Peter. In the last letter Paul wrote to Timothy from Rome, he said, "Only Luke is with me," and "At my first defense, no one took my part, but all forsook me" (2 Timothy 4:11,16). Where was Peter? He was not in Rome? Peter did not fit the Papal pattern because Peter taught doctrines different from that of the Pope. Peter believed in baptizing only those who had been taught, and who believed and repented (Acts 2:38). There is no record of his baptizing anyone who was too young to understand what he was doing. Peter taught that disciples of Christ should wear the name "Christian" (1 Peter 4:16). Peter did not believe in traditions, but taught that God's Word contains "ALL things that pertain unto life and godliness" (2 Peter 1:3). Peter agreed with the doctrine that Jesus Christ is the only head of the church (Colossians 1:18; 2:10; Ephesians 1:22; 4:15; 5:23), and that Christ nowhere authorized any man to be head of the church on earth since "ALL authority in heaven and on earth" had been given to Christ (Matthew 28:18).

You wrote, "Your numbering of the Ten Commandments is Wrong ~ that's because you are using an incomplete bible and misinterpreting it."

Another FALSE Charge James! The Sabbath COMMAND is the FOURTH Commandment according to my Bible AND according to the Hebrew Bible. Catholics are GUILTY of CHANGING the Word of God for they have deleted the Second Commandment which states, "You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. (Exodus 20:4-5).

You still have NOT answered my question why Catholics do NOT observe the Sabbath? Just because Jesus did good on the Sabbath does NOT mean that one does not have to observe it, especially if they claim that the Ten Commandments are still in force today.

You wrote, "The Holy Eucharist was instituted by Jesus Himself during the Last Supper. Get a grip!"

The Word of God is EFFECTIVE in CASTING DOWN your false arguments for Jesus PLAINLY stated in John 6:63, "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life."

Jesus did NOT make Peter the ?Vicar of the Church? and no such NONSENSE is even promoted in the Bible. Please read Luke 22:24-30. Peter was NOT the first Pope, Christ is the ONLY foundation (1 Cor. 3:11; Eph. 2:20-22; 1 Pet. 2:5-7). Don?t you think that Peter would have been mentioned in some of those verses if he was ?The Rock? as you so state? Galatians 2:7-10 states that the gospel for the uncircumcised (Gentiles) had been committed to Paul, and the gospel for the circumcised (Jews) was committed to Peter. Also James, Cephas (Peter) and John seemed to be pillars (Galatians 2:8) flies directly in the face of Peter having primacy over the other apostles. Since the gospel for the Gentiles was committed to Paul, how can the Catholic church claim that Peter is the head of the Church? This is not hard to understand now is it? Unless of course you don?t want to understand.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 18, 2003.


To Kevin, [Name calling deleted by Moderator](Let us not forget that Satan Persecuted the Holy Catholic Church for 2000 years and counting ... Satan uses real people to persecute and malign the Holy Catholic Church and her Sacred Teachings and Sacred Beliefs)

This is an Infallible Sacred Belief of the Holy Catholic Church:

MARY IS EVER VIRGIN

The deepening of faith in the virginal motherhood led the Catholic Church to confess Mary's real and Perpetual Virginity even in the act of giving birth to the Son of God made man.

In fact, Christ's birth "did not diminish his mother's virginal integrity but sanctified it."

And so the Catholic Church celebrates Mary as Ever-Virgin. (Catholic Council of Vatican II, 1962-1965 A.D.,Lumen Gentium)

Against this doctrine the objection is sometimes raised that the Bible mentions brother and sisters of Jesus.

The 2000 year old Catholic Church has always understood these passages as not referring to other children of the Virgin Mary.

In fact, James and Joseph, "brothers of Jesus," are the sons of another Mary, a disciple of Christ, whom St. Matthew significantly calls "the other Mary."

These are close relations of Jesus, according to an Old Testament expression.

Jesus is Mary's only son, but her spiritual motherhood extends to all men whom indeed He came to save:

"The Son whom she brought forth is He whom God placed as the first- born among many brethren, that is, the faithful in whose generation and formulation she cooperates with a mother's love.

~ from the Infallible and True Catechism of the Catholic Church Inspired by God the Holy Spirit

The Catholic Church is Noah's Ark ~ you are OUTSIDE the Ark in the Great Flood.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.


james,

I advise you to stop calling Kevin names. I do not want to ban you. Attack the message, NOT the messenger!

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.


Kevin wrote,"she is NOT even in Heaven yet!!!"

Where do believers go when they die? I thought it was either Heaven or Hades.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.


David, you little "Ninny", since when did you start putting Kevin's reputation above Jesus Our Saviour's?

Welp's blasphemy link. You still have not fixed the problem.

rod "the whistle blower"...

..


-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 18, 2003.


Thanks for reminding me. I haven't had the time because of yesterdays game and Pigskin today. I'll fix that ASAP.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 18, 2003.

David, also an Enemy of the Holy Catholic Church, in Alliance with Kevin, another Enemy of the Holy Catholic Church (Let us not forget that Satan has evil angels as allies)

those are not names ~ they are Titles like President, Prime Minister

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 19, 2003.


james,

I do not agree with everything Kevin says, but this forum has rules which you could read right here I am a Christian, and I'm trying not to resort to name calling.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 19, 2003.


or shall we say degrees like PhD, MD

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 19, 2003.

David,

I am so happy to hear that you do not agree with everything Kevin says.

You have Hope.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 19, 2003.


Thank You David for the "clean-up" on aisle 6.

rod..

..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 19, 2003.


David, a possible (0.001%) Catholic Convert (let us remember St. Paul was a Jew and became a Catholic)

to give someone Titles is not a personal attack at all ~ but simply stating ~ the OBVIOUS

I am well within the rules of this game.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 19, 2003.


The rules in this forum are flawed. We can't discuss Catholic Doctrine. I guess the doctrine isn't really discussed, but used as a resource for refutiation. But, any other doctrine is permissible. Do we sense some anti-Catholicism here?..........naw......what am I thinking??!!

Yes, I did see the added thread categories; Was that your idea, David? If so, thanks. If not, thanks.

rod..

..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 19, 2003.


Kevin,

Why is it only your church that "obeys" the gospel. Is using an instrument in worship damning someone to hell? (We already has this discussion, I would perfer a yes or no answer)

Also, I am sure there are other churches that "obey" the gospel and not only the Church of Christ (denomination of).

james,

There is a zero percent chance of me converting to Romanism. I find it strange that even cults find Romanism wrong.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 19, 2003.


rod says "We can't discuss Catholic Doctrine."

You are free to discuss any doctrine, but I think if you had a Catholic question you would get a better answer at the Catholic forum.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 19, 2003.


I'm being really nice rigth now. My comments we not leave my fingers.

rod..

..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 19, 2003.


To Rod, A Catholic Christian, amidst snakes and sharks (let us remember how the Catholics for 2000 years have been persecuted and maligned by the Enemy called Satan)

Have you checked out EWTN ~ ewtn.com ?

They have a great Authentic Catholic Q & A only for Catholics (no heretics allowed)

To David, who said Never (let us remember St. Paul who said, "Never." but became a Catholic when he saw the blinding Light on the road to Damascus; Let us also remember John Henry Newman, an ex-Anglican Protestant Minister who in old adulthood became a Catholic and now a Venerable Catholic in Heaven.)

Never say Never.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 19, 2003.


David,

You wrote, "Where do believers go when they die? I thought it was either Heaven or Hades."

Go back and re-read Luke 16:19-31 the story of Lazarus and the Rich man.

Jesus also did NOT go up to heaven when He died. Go back and re-read Luke 23:43.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 21, 2003.


David,

You wrote, "Why is it only your church that "obeys" the gospel."

First, it isn't my church, it is the church in which Jesus stated He would build. Second, Hebrews 5:9 states that Jesus is the "author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him." Romans 1:16 states that it is the gospel that is God's power to salvation. The church of Christ teaches that one must OBEY the gospel or they will be lost, EXACTLY as 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 states.

Please tell me David which denomination teaches that one must obey the gospel in order to be saved? The majority of them teach that one is saved by "faith only" and that is NOT what the Bible teaches one must do in order to be saved.

You wrote, "Is using an instrument in worship damning someone to hell? (We already has this discussion, I would perfer a yes or no answer)"

Yes, we have had this discussion already and I do not understand why you continue to bring up the subject when you already know what my response will be??? YES is my answer and this has already been explained to you from the Bible and yet you continue to REJECT what God has specifically stated on the kind of music God expects in our worship to Him.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 21, 2003.


James,

As expected, you did NOT answer my earlier post in order to confirm your positions from the Bible.

This does not surprise me for there is NO support in the Word of God for MANY of the false doctrines that have come from the Catholic Church.

First, there is no such thing as an "infallible sacred belief".

Second the ONLY thing "Holy" about the Catholic Church are her doctrines that have holes cut through them by the Sword of The Spirit which is the Word of God. (Ephesians 6:17).

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 21, 2003.


To Kevin, [Name calling deleted by Moderator]

Why should I trust your MISINTERPRETATIONS of the Holy Bible given to you by The Catholic Church?

Why should You Yourself trust your MISINTERPRETATIONS of the Holy Bible given to you by The Holy Catholic Church?

Why should Anyone trust your MISINTERPRETATIONS of the Holy Bible given to you by The Holy Catholic Church?

Who gives you the authority to MISINTERPRET the Holy Bible given to you by the Holy Catholic Church?

YOU WEAVE AND KNIT BIBLE VERSES AND CREATE YOUR OWN FABRICATION OF FANCIFUL MISINTERPRETATIONS.

YOU WEAVE AND KNIT BIBLE VERSES AND FORM YOUR OWN FAULTY CONCLUSIONS.

YOU WEAVE AND KNIT BIBLE VERSES AND DECLARE A NEW FOUND "TRUTH."

Go to The Authority in Correct Bible Interpretation for Two Milleniums!

The One who Wrote, Identified, Sifted, Assembled, Published, Interpreted, and Applied the Holy Bible ~ no other than the Holy Catholic Church!

You have NOT furnished us with the Dubious History of your Radical and Fantastic BABY "church." Nor have you furnished us with the prominent figures of your Radical and Fantastic BABY "church." You must be its most illustrious MISINTERPRETER.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 21, 2003.


Yes, his denomination would seem like a baby when compared to a 4,000 year old pagan religion.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 21, 2003.

And james, you are incorrect; The Roman Church did not give us the bible. The Jews gave us the Old Testament. It was their scribes that preserved the Old Testament word for word; The Roman Church had no right to add the Apocrypha to it.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 21, 2003.

David, with Hope

If you are accusing the Holy Catholic Church as being "a 4000 year old pagan religion," you are wrong on two points:

1. The Holy Catholic Church was not and is not a pagan religion. In fact, The early christians of the first three centuries, all Catholics, were Martyred for being followers of Christ by the Pagan Roman Emperors.

2. The Holy Catholic Church is not 4,000 years old. The Holy Catholic Church is 2,000 years old.

The Jews (just like your name, Saint King David) are pre-Catholics. They are the Root, and therefore, belong to the Body of Christ ~ The Holy Catholic Church; and therefore, the writings of the Jews also belong to the Holy Catholic Church.

David, you will not be holding a Bible today if it were not for the Holy Catholic Church who identified and assembled the Bible in the Catholic Synod of Rome in 382.A.D.

What you call the Apocrypha was included in the first Protestant King James Version of the Holy Bible published in 1611 A.D. You can still buy from Cambridge University Press this original Protestant version complete with Apocrypha which you claim as having "no right" being there. David, plain and simple, you are using an Incomplete Bible even in Protestant standards.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 21, 2003.


David when are you going to study the history if mentioned and linked to? You are making accusations that are errant. Will you please study up some on the history of the Bible? You have stated before that you don't need to know the history, don't cut yourself short!

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 22, 2003.


David wrote:

"And james, you are incorrect; The Roman Church did not give us the bible. The Jews gave us the Old Testament. It was their scribes that preserved the Old Testament word for word; The Roman Church had no right to add the Apocrypha to it. "

And....

You accept that fact, David. But, then you go and condemn the idea of TRADITION as the resource of the Catholic Bible, yet it is ok for you to condone the TRADITIONS of the Jews in their scrolls. Amazing! You still have no idea of the "other gospels" that were being subscribed to and that were steering believers in the wrong directions. Had the Church not filtered these theologies/gospels, where would you be right now, David?

Pick one....or more, below:

1. Gnosticism.
2. Idolitrist.
3. Paganism.
4. Jewish.
5. Church of Corinth.
6. Church of Ephesians.
7. Catholicism.
8. Agnosticism.
9. Atheism.
10.Satanism.
11.The list goes on.

I tend to think that we would more than likely would have followed around with the people who knew something about something. Or at least, I hope we would have.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 22, 2003.


Yes, I know that you will say that a person will know the true path to take in the Gospels. The truth would have eventually made itself obvious. Not if you adhere to "Sola Scriptura" and even then you would still have needed the Catholic Church for such a false doctrine to even exist.

Gosh! I would love to take a Protestant back in time to see which of the doctrines/gospels he would have believed in. There were more than tons of scriptures available. If we think that the 30,000 some odd doctrines are a big deal today, imagine the infancy of Christianity--the number was smaller, but the confusion was just as proportionate.

When a fundamentalist-protestant Bible reader interprets Scriptures, who is there ta make sure that the interpretations conform to the "church" doctrines? Elders, yes? How are Elders different from any other institution that has interpreters or keepers of the faith? Or, is it a free for all and let the strongest voice win? Your ultimate response should end with, "God's voice through the Bible is final". Well, of course, but have a look around and tell me how the fantastic splintering of His Word is the final voice. Your child's prime teacher is you as a father or mother. The child depends on his parent(s) and the ladder of education must follow up to a higher authority. Every denomination, church, sect, whatever you call it, has that ladder of leadership in the Gospel. It just so happens that a 2000 year old Church has a far more advanced structured "ladder".

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 22, 2003.


rod says,"Will you please study up some on the history of the Bible?"

Well that's your problem, I think you should read the Bible instead. I think you reading all this Roman propaganda and gnostic writings has gone to your head. I don't see you using any logic whatsoever.

Example of Romanist logic: Quote from Apocrypha "All this is BS, don't believe any of it. This is not the word of God...This is not perfect...blah" - Book Whatever

Pope says "Book Whatever is the Word of God because I say so. You should study it....blah blah blah...blah blah blah...Them heretics don't know what they missing...blah."

rod, Get real! You expect me to believe that a document that plainly tells us is not the Word of God to be inspired scripture just because some old man in a funny hat said so? No!

Is God's Word perfect? Yes. Is the Apocrypha perfect? No. Who to believe...?

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 22, 2003.


James,

If I am such a MISINTERPRETER of the Bible as you so state, I have yet to see you PROVE IT. I showed you in Scripture where your (the Catholic Church) interpretation did err, and the only thing you reply with is the Catechism of the Catholic Church. This does NOT suprise me in the least because if you had an answer in God's word concerning your (the Catholic Church's) false doctrines, I am sure that you would provide them and show everyone here that I am not telling the truth.

Anyone who is seeking the TRUTH can PLAINLY see that the doctrines that you hold as the TRUTH (the Assumption of Mary, Mary Queen of Heaven, etc...) are NOT found in the Word of God!!!!

If I am the "most illustrious MISINTERPRETER" as you charge, then I would like to suggest that you go and get a Catholic Priest so that he can correct my MISINTERPRETATIONS since you obviously do not have the capacity to do this yourself as evidence by your lack of desire to correct me what God's word states.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 22, 2003.


Thank you, David. I read and I study. I think and I believe. I'll continue with my struggle and find the truth where I can. May God help us all in our faith.
Peace.

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 22, 2003.


To Rod, a Catholic Christian, Baptised in the Most Holy Catholic Church, To Rod who Received the Most Holy Communion in the Most Holy Catholic Church, To Rod who Received the Brown Scapular of the Most Holy Order of the Carmelite Friars and Nuns,

You were Born Again in the Most Holy Water and the Most Holy Spirit when you were Baptised as a mere infant ~ what a Priceless Gift from your loving parents who fulfilled their obligation of raising you in the Fullness of the Truth in the Most Holy Catholic Church. (The belief of the schismatic protestants that Catholics need to be born again Again is ridiculously erroneous.)

How they increased their Gifts upon you when they assisted you in your Catholic education and when they assisted you in your reception of the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Eucharist during your First Most Holy Communion! What supercedes the reception of the Most Holy Eucharist? Nothing. It is the Most Intimate Union with Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ ~ we become united with Him in our body, blood, soul, and spirit. And we can receive the Most Holy Eucharist Everyday. Of course, God the Holy Spirit is in the middle of all this and surrounding all this. Furthermore, God the Father oversees all this. This is precisely the Marriage of the Lamb and the Church right here on earth!!! What can supercede this? Nothing. The Most Holy Eucharist is the Source and Summit of the Christian Life. Grace and More Grace are added upon us whenever we receive the Most Holy Eucharist. And this Infinite Grace can only be found in the Most Holy Catholic Church ~ Nowhere Else ~ Just like Mary ~ the Ark of the Covenant. The Most Holy Catholic Church is Noah's Ark ~ Outside is the Great Flood.

Jesus said, "Be not afraid." Matthew 17:7

The first three words of our Beloved Pope John Paul II in the beginning of his Pontificate were, "Be not afraid."

I implore you, be not afraid, and take the leap of faith, you are doing the right thing,

Embrace the Most Holy Catholic Church Fully.

The Intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Our Mother, is ever upon you. The Intercession of St. Joseph, Our Foster-Father, is ever upon you. The Intercession of All the Most Holy Angels is ever upon you. The Intercession of All the Most Holy Saints is ever upon you.

The Fullness of the Truth and the Fullness of the Means of Salvation are in the Most Holy Catholic Church. They have always been and always will be.

"Be not deceived." James 1:16

For two thousand years, the Most Holy Catholic Church has been fighting and annihilating Heresies left and right, inside and out, and you know what? She has Always been Triumphantly Successful for two thousand years and counting.

Peace be with you, my true brother in Jesus Christ Our Lord.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 23, 2003.


David ~ With Hope,

1 minute Bible History:

382 AD: Catholic Holy Bible with ALL 73 Books which includes the 7 Apocrypha

500 AD: Catholic Holy Bible has been translated into Over 500 Languages.

600 AD: LATIN was the Only Language Allowed for Scripture.

1611 AD: The Protestant King James Bible with ALL 73 Books which includes the 7 Apocrypha.

Conclusion: The 7 Apocrypha is Perfect, David, just like the rest of the Holy Bible.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 23, 2003.


Thank you!

I have made an obvious change in my life as a result of the research I've done. I know where the light comes from. Your support has been a blessing to me, James.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 23, 2003.


No problem, Rod.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 23, 2003.

rod,

If you believe that you were "born again" when you were baptized as an infant (as James states), then you have been DECEIVED.

To claim that one can be baptized first and then come to faith in God at a later date is NOT what God's word teaches.

Faith ONLY comes from "hearing" God's word EXACTLY as stated in Romans 10:17.

The Catholic Church does LIE when they state that one can be baptized INTO Christ as an infant. An infant CANNOT have faith, so they CANNOT be saved for they have NO sins to wash away to begin with. Go back and re-read Ezekiel 18:20.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 23, 2003.


Hi Kevin.

The Church of Christ does not put too much weight on the Old Testament, so why the reference to Ezekiel 18:20 from the Old Testament in regards to Baptism?

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 23, 2003.


Here goes Kevin again with his 1 year old doctrine.

Rod, stick with the 2000 year old Doctrine.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 23, 2003.


Faith ONLY comes from "hearing" God's word EXACTLY as stated in Romans 10:17.

"[H]earing" sure does give one the idea of tradition being communicated to the believer. I imagine that there was a time in history when the majority of the population was illiterate(sp?).

What should I do with the faith that I have now?

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 23, 2003.


Sacred Truth:

The Magisterium of the Holy Catholic Church says:

The Baptism of infants

Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the NEW BIRTH in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called. The sheer gratuitousness of the Grace of Salvation is particularly manifest in infant Baptism. The Church and the Parents would Deny a child the Priceless Grace of becoming a Child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth.

Christian Parents will recognize that this practice also accords with their role as nurturers of the life that God has entrusted to them.

The practice of infant Baptism is an Immemorial Tradition of the Church. There is explicit testimony to this practice from the Second Century on, and it is quite possible that, from the beginning of the apostolic preaching, when whole "households" received baptism, infants have been baptized. (Acts 16:15,33; 1 Cor 1:16)

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 23, 2003.


rod,

Who says that the church of Christ does not put much weight on the Old Testament??? Just because we are not under the OT law does not mean that we cannot use the OT. Ezekiel 18:20 PLAINLY states that sins CANNOT be passed down from one person to another.

How hard is this for you to understand???

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.


rod,

Hearing as stated in Romans 10:17 has NOTHING to do with tradition.

You wrote, "what should I do with the faith I have now"

Obey the gospel rod!!! If you do not obey the gospel and remain a Catholic you will not be saved.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.


James says the baptism of infants is sacred truth.

Let's see if that is true:

The Word of God states: In Acts 16:15, Yes Lydia and her household were baptized, however, if you look at verse 14, the Lord had to open her heart to "heed" the things spoken by Paul. This means that she had to OBEY all of the requirements to be saved which included being baptized.

Infants are NOT able to "heed" anything.

As for Acts 16:33, yes it says that he and all his family were baptized, but in order to "believe" (verse 31) they first had to have the Word of the Lord SPOKEN to them (verse 32) this INFERS that one is able to UNDERSTAND what is being told to them. In verse 34, the Jailer rejoiced, having believed in God with all his household.

Since infants CANNOT believe or obey, they are not able to be baptized.

As for 1 Cor 1:16, once again, just because it says that Paul baptized the household of Stephanus is NO indication that babies were baptized. Look at verse 18, where Paul said that the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing. One must have UNDERSTANDING of the message before they are accountable to God.

I have said many times that before one is baptized one MUST have faith.

I have NOT had one Catholic EVER prove from the Word of God where this is not the case.

So, to claim that infants are included in households when they were baptized is NOT in accordance with the Word of God.

James AND the Catholic Church do tell a LIE when they state that an infant can be saved WITHOUT FAITH.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.


Kevin, [Name calling deleted by Moderator]

Get in the Ark!

See, all those little Fundie tracts you got from the sidewalk corners got to your brain.

If you get all those those Fundie tracts (all still warm from the publisher) and compare them with each other ~ they will be screaming "murder!"

You said, "I have NOT had one Catholic EVER prove from the Word of God where this is not the case."

You know, Kevin,

There was a time in Christendom when there was no Bible. And the King Jesus had to go to Heaven and also rule on earth. The King Jesus decided to rule through an appointed Leader. The appointed Leader's name was Peter. King Jesus gave Peter the Holy Spirit as a Guide. Peter had 11 other friends whom the King also appointed to rule but the King appointed Peter as the head of the eleven. Everything Peter said must be obeyed. The eleven had been obedient. As Peter and the 11 ruled, they began to form Traditions. All of Christendom followed all the Traditions Peter and the 11 decreed. All of Christendom loved their Traditions. One of the Traditions was infant baptism. All of Christendom followed the Tradition of infant baptism. All of Christendom loved infant baptisms. One day, after 350 years of Traditions, the Twelve decided to assemble a book that is In Accordance with all their Traditions for the past 350 years. This book came to be known as the Holy Bible. And all of Christendom loved this book.

See, Kevin, I have yet to see a 3" x 5" Fundie tract that mentions the Traditions of Peter and the 11 Apostles.

You said Kevin, "I have said many times that before one is baptized one MUST have faith."

The PARENTS have Faith in Jesus and the Holy Catholic Church. The infant has Faith through his or her Parents whom he or she innocently TRUST ~ FAITH. The Gracious Parents are giving the innocent infant a Priceless Gift by letting the infant be Immersed in the Most Holy Water and letting the Dove of the Most Holy Spirit descend upon him or her. The infant is Born Again in Water and in Spirit and has a New Life through this Baptism. (John 3)

See Kevin, if Peter and the 11 had decided not to assemble the Bible in the 4th Century, all christians would still be following the very same exact Traditions. It is only logical that one has to follow the Traditions to be a christian (especially in this hypothetical scenario). And you know what, too, Kevin, this is the BEST LOGIC ~ had the Bible not been assembled in the 4th Century, there would be no protestants like you ~ all christians would be Catholic!

See, you should dump all those warm, and Colourful, and radical, and fantastic, Fundie tracts

and go for the ancient, historic, 2000 year old, Solid Doctrine of the Most Holy Catholic Church.

Live life and smell the incense.

Peace.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 24, 2003.


James,

You really do NOT know what you are talking about now do you???

To make the IGNORANT claim that someone (parents) can transfer their faith to an infant (which is what you are claiming) is NOT in accordance with the Word of God.

Your silly little putdowns do nothing except show how much you do NOT know about the Word of God and really PROVE that you are acting very much like a child in your responses to my posts. This does not surprise me in the least because that is EXACTLY the same thing that happened to me and to David while we posted in the Catholic forum.

GROW UP!!!

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.


Kevin, [Name calling deleted by Moderator]

Your Sola Scriptura mindset lacks the other half of truth ~ that's why you are only Half-Truth and need to grow up.

The Fullness of Truth in the Most Holy Catholic Church has both Most Holy Traditions of the Most Holy Apostles AND the Most Holy Bible which She Assembled for you.

Will you live to smell the incense?

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 24, 2003.


The expression "sola scriptura" is a Latin term that reflects the affirmation that the "Scriptures alone" constitute the source of sacred revelation for the Christian age.

There are at least three serious errors ? advocated by the prevailing authorities of the Roman Catholic Church ? that pertain to the nature of the Scriptures.

First, it is contended that the sixty-six books of our common Bibles do not contain the whole of the collection of divine writings. Hence, Catholic Bibles are appended with several extra books ? known as the Apocrypha. However, the TRUTH is, these supplementary books were NOT a part of the original Hebrew Bible. Moreover, they were NEVER sanctioned by Christ, nor by the inspired New Testament writers. Finally, they do NOT bear the marks of inspiration that would be expected of a divine document; they thus are to be REJECTED.

Second, Catholic authorities allege that the common person CANNOT UNDERSTAND the Word of God. There needs to be, therefore, a "clergy" to instruct the "lay" person in terms of what he is to believe and practice. This concept likewise is VOID of justification. Paul instructed the Christians in Ephesus to "be not foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is" (Eph. 5:17). The Apostle told those saints that, by reading his words, they COULD UNDERSTAND those matters pertaining to Christ (Eph. 3:3-4). Additionally, the FACT that the New Testament epistles were written to ordinary Christians ? NOT to an upper-strata clergy, is, on the face of it, evidence AGAINST the papal theory.

Third, Catholicism contends that the canonical Scriptures were never intended to be the final body of authority in determining God's truth for humanity. Rather, it is argued, "the Bible is not the only source of faith ... but is a dead letter ...." Supposedly, this means that the "tradition of the Church," as such has been made known across the centuries through the councils and papal voices of the Roman institution, has been divinely intended to supplement the Scriptures. Allegedly, then, religious dogma evolves over the years by means of an expanding body of revealed truth.

It is to this third proposition that we direct a sharper focus in this brief essay.

The ALLEGATION that the sixty-six books of Scripture are an incomplete source of divine instruction, stands in stark CONTRADICTION to the TESTIMONY of an inspired Apostle. In a letter to Timothy, Paul wrote. "Every scripture is inspired of God, and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness. That the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16-17). Several terms in this passage warrant amplification.

What is "Scripture"?

"Scripture" renders the original word graphe, found about 51 times in the Greek New Testament. The term ALWAYS refers to a sacred writing. Most commonly it denotes the holy writings of the Old Testament, but the absence of a Greek article in conjunction with graphe in this passage "leaves room for other writings that have a right to be called divinely inspired Scriptures". Without question, the term "scripture" embraces both Old and New Testaments. See 1 Timothy 5:18 and in 2 Peter 3:16 where the term is used comprehensively of both Testaments.

The Purpose of "Scripture"

The Scriptures are described as having been intended to make the "man [person] of God complete," and "furnished completely" for the accomplishment of "every good work." The two terms "complete" (artios) and "furnished completely" (exartizo ? an intensified verbal form of the previous word) suggest the idea of that which is "well fitted for some function, complete, capable, proficient," the equivalent of, "able to meet all demands". The compound form, exartizo, carries two ideas, "to finish" or "complete" (cf. Acts 21:5), and to "connect perfectly, fit to perfection".

The point we are making relative to the matter at hand is this. If the Scriptures are capable of making a person complete, and furnishing him completely for every righteous activity, then it CANNOT be argued that the Bible is but a "dead letter," inadequate for one's religious instruction. It must not be contended that the "voice of the church" is imperative, both traditionally and currently, to complete the Christian's source of knowledge.

Sola Scriptura?

Most Christians had no access to the Scriptures before the invention of the printing press, hence, the idea of sola scriptura cannot obtain where there is no widespread availability of the New Testament documents.

Just because gospel teaching was not circulated originally, in the precise format in which the Scriptures now exist, constitutes no argument at all to negate the undisputed fact that in those early centuries multiplied thousands of people became Christians, grew in the faith, and died with the hope of heaven, upon the basis of the simple gospel message. And all of this was achieved without the alleged interpretative skills or authority of popes, cardinals, arch-bishops, synods, or human credos ? which conglomeration, in fact, did not exist for centuries following the establishment of primitive Christianity.

One must also remember that in earlier times, when printed materials were not so readily available, people relied upon the memory faculty of the human mind much more than is the case today. Sufficient gospel truth for redemption, therefore, was spread abroad ? even before the New Testament records were completed. As the New Testament documents were produced, and began to be circulated, numerous copies were made, and vast quantities of those were committed to memory. To suggest, then, that the pattern for New Testament belief and practice was unknown in those early ages is to contradict known historical facts. But reflect upon on the following data which suggest a widespread distribution of the Scriptures.

Polycarp, who lived in Smyrna (Asia Minor) around A.D. 70-155/60, in his small epistle to the Philippians, quoted from, or alluded to, no fewer than thirteen of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament.

Origen (A.D. c. 185-254), whose work was done principally in Alexandria and Caesarea, produced hundreds of writings pertaining to the Bible. In his various works there are more than 5,700 quotations from the New Testament.

Tertullian (A.D. c. 160-220), who lived in Africa, quoted the New Testament more than 3,000 times in his various writings.

This sort of evidence could be multiplied many times over. Bruce Metzger, one of the foremost textual critics of our time, has observed that the New Testament quotations from the "church fathers" are so extensive that if the New Testament were destroyed entirely, it could be reconstructed from these sources alone.

Even more dramatic than the above is the fact that even infidel writers (e.g., Celsus ? mid-second century, and Porphyry ? early fourth century) quoted profusely from the Scriptures in their vain attempts to discredit Christianity. How did they come to have access to the sacred writings if these documents were so scarce and so expensive in those days, as to be beyond the grasp of almost everyone?

The truth is, the early Christians copied the Scriptures extensively, and translated them into many different languages (in an age when literary translation was extremely rare). This constitutes powerful evidence for the reality that the biblical documents were perceived by the early saints as divine entitlements for the masses, and not merely a deposit to be hoarded by a select clerical elite who then would convey "official dogma" to the people. Even when the Bible became available, copies were so expensive that few could afford them.

This assertion is answered by the data chronicled above.

In those early days, few could read; and so the Scriptures alone would do them little good. The voice of the Church thus was needed additionally.

This argument is seriously flawed ? both logically and historically. The fact that one may not be able to read does not mean he cannot be taught the gospel by trustworthy people. Many who are not literate technically have obeyed gospel truth and enjoyed the benefits of salvation.

How would an illiterate Catholic learn of the official dogma of the Roman clergy if he is unable to read his catechism? And how would the "voice" of the papacy be "heard" by the masses in those times when there were no media outlets of rapid and universal communication?

It is quite incorrect to imply that the masses of people generally have been unable to read. An archaeological artifact, the Gezer Calendar, which dates from the tenth century before Christ, is a schoolboy's exercise. It demonstrates that reading and writing were a part of ancient Israel's culture, even among the youth. The fact is, archaeology has demonstrated the existence of schools going back at least 2,500 before the birth of Christ. Archaeological and literary evidence have shown than in first-century Palestine most folks were conversant with three languages ? Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

Even Jesus could read and write (Lk. 4:16ff; Jn. 7:15; 8:6, 8), though He was raised in a very impoverished family environment (cf. Lk. 2:24, with reference to the "poor" offering; see also 2 Cor. 8:9) and, early-on followed the trade of a carpenter (Mk. 6:3). Peter and John, who were only humble fishermen ? not scholastics (see Acts 4:13), could read and write ? as demonstrated by their respective contributions to the New Testament collection. The "illiterate" argument is much ado about nothing.

Unlearned people do not have access to "scholarly" sources, thus whatever knowledge they have is most likely flawed.

By the same token, a Catholic "lay" person could hardly know of the reliability of the dogma received from their clergy. They have no access to the countless volumes of decisions that have been handed down from the various Councils. How could they possibly assess the numerous controversies that have raged across the centuries in the very bosom of the Roman Church itself?

The TRUTH is, however, one does not need to have "scholarly" sources to ascertain God's plan of redemption and submit thereto. An honest consultation of the New Testament provides adequate information for instruction regarding how to obtain salvation, the fundamentals of church government, worship procedure, godly living, and such like. While grammatical and historical minutia may be of value in honing the finer points of doctrine, it is not essential to attaining heaven.

Hardworking folks have little time for study, and so they need someone to tell them what to believe. It requires no more time to study the New Testament than it does to peruse a catechism or listen to a priest recite dogma from some pope or council. Such a line of argumentation is embarrassingly IMPOTENT.

Through much of Christian history, people have had improper diets. This lack of nutrition resulted in their brains being unable to function critically. Hence, they could not draw rational deductions from studying the Bible alone.

This argument, quite frankly, is pathetic. If it applies to those who desire to study the Scriptures, but cannot think clearly because of unnourished brains, it applies equally to the instruction received from the Catholic clergy.

Why, pray tell, would it be more difficult to comprehend the teaching of the inspired New Testament writers, than it would be to ingest the teachings of uninspired Roman Catholic instructors? Might it not explain why Catholicism has made its greatest inroads in the most impoverished nations of the world?

Since a high level of critical skill is necessary for interpreting the Scriptures, and, as most folks do not possess such skill, common sense would dictate that Church officials do their thinking for them. This final quibble is in the same vein as the previous three, and responses to those matters need not be reiterated here. We would conclude this discussion with a reference to George Salmon?s masterful volume, The Infallibility of the Church ? a book so powerful in its exposure of Catholic claims, that it has never been answered by papal apologists.

In fact, noted Catholic scholar P.J. Toner, who authored the article on "Infallibility" in the Catholic Encyclopedia, described Salmon's work as "the cleverest modern attack on the Catholic position" of this issue.

"Cleverest" is an understatement; it is a devastating exposure of Catholic propaganda relative to the "authority" of the Roman Church. Salmon points out that it is an undeniable historical fact that as the Roman ecclesiastical system evolved, the time came when Catholic clerics surrendered the idea that the doctrine and practice of the Roman Church could be defended by the Scriptures. Hence, by default, the notion arose that "the Bible does not contain the whole of God's revelation, and that a body of traditional doctrine existed in the Church equally deserving of veneration". Ambitiously-driven lusts for release from the authority of the Holy Scriptures has given birth to numerous heretical claims of special revelation from God.

Sola Scriptura remains as the valid procedure for pursuing the Mind of the Lord.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 24, 2003.


Kevin, [Name calling deleted by Moderator],

You don't get it, do you?

IF you were born Illiterate,

in the year 300 A.D.,

you will NOT have Sola Scriptura

because there was NO Holy Bible then

and You Were ILLITERATE.

Had you wanted to become a christian then

you would have to rely on the HOLY TRADITION of the Holy Apostles,

because you were Illiterate,

and your only option was Holy CATHOLICISM

The Holy Tradition made sure that the Holy Bible compiled was

in Accordance with the Holy Tradition.

Therefore,

the Holy Bible does not negate the Holy Tradition.

Holy Tradition and Holy Bible are ONE.

Furthermore,

only the top holy men, who were the Teaching Office of the Church,

were allowed to Interpret the Holy Bible.

The Magisterium, as they were known,

Interpreted the Holy Bible CORRECTLY

through the Guidance of the Holy Spirit

as promised by Christ upon the Holy Catholic Church.

2 Peter 1:20:

KNOW THIS FIRST OF ALL, THAT THERE IS NO PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURE THAT IS A MATTER OF PERSONAL INTERPRETATION ...

The New American Bible explains: These verses are directed AGAINST the personal interpretation of false teachers of clever tales (this is exactly YOU, Kevin ~ Misinterpreter of the 1600 year old Holy Bible. And your Misinterpretation is the 34,001st wrong interpretion of the Children of Luther. O by the way, you have Still NOT furnished us with the Very Dubious History of your Radical and Fantastic 1 year old church who spreads warm tracts on sidewalk corners to deceive people).

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


FOR ROD, David, and Kevin,

SACRED TRUTH:

THE MAGISTERIUM OF THE MOST HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH SAYS:

THE TRANSMISSION OF DIVINE REVELATION

God "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth": that is, of Christ Jesus. Christ must be proclaimed to all nations and individuals, so that this revelation may reach to the ends of the earth:

God graciously arranged that the things he had once revealed for the salvation of all peoples should remain in their entirety, throughout the ages, and be transmitted to all generations.

THE APOSTOLIC TRADITION

"Christ the Lord, in whom the entire Revelation of the most high God is summed up, commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel, which had been promised beforehand by the prophets, and which he fulfilled in his own person and promulgated with his own lips. In preaching the Gospel, they were to communicate the gifts of God to all men. This Gospel was to be the source of all saving truth and moral discipline."

In the apostolic preaching . . .

In keeping with the Lord's command, the Gospel was handed on in TWO WAYS:

—ORALLY "by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves had received—whether from the lips of Christ, from his way of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit";

—in writing "by those apostles and other men associated with the apostles who, under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit, committed the message of salvation to writing."

. . . continued in Apostolic Succession

"In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left Bishops as their successors. They gave them ‘their own position of Teaching Authority.'" Indeed, "the Apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time."

This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called TRADITION, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it. Through TRADITION, "the Church, in her doctrine, life, and worship perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes." "The sayings of the holy Fathers are a witness to the life-giving presence of this TRADITION, showing how its riches are poured out in the practice and life of the Church, in her belief and her prayer." The Father's self-communication made through his Word in the Holy Spirit, remains present and active in the Church: "God, who spoke in the past, continues to converse with the Spouse of his beloved Son. And the Holy Spirit, through whom the living voice of the Gospel rings out in the Church—and through her in the world—leads believers to the full truth, and makes the Word of Christ dwell in them in all its richness."

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


David,

You are very biased for Kevin, as expected because your souls intertwine. Your deletions as a moderator are unfounded. Those are not name calling as you label them but they are obvious titles of the person. David, names and titles are different; names and descriptions are different, too. I'm very surprised that you left the good titles and descriptions. Is to call you anti-Catholic name calling? Heck no. Is to call you an enemy of the Most Holy Catholic Church name calling? It is so OBVIOUS, that you are by your own sentences, and therefore you merit a title, to deny yourself with that title is to lie to yourself. Is to call Kevin a Staunch Enemy of the Most Holy Catholic Church name calling? He himself admits to the Fact and he is Proud of it! To deny him that title and description is for him to lie to himself. To describe someone as So Lost, a true fact, you may not agree, but that is not name calling. So your very biased decision to delete those titles and descriptions is a very bad decision on your part as a moderator.

BooOOOOOOOOO!

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


I made that premonition at the inauguration of David's crowning.

rod...

..

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


Let's take a look at TRADITION in the Catholic Church.

Tradition plays an important role in the belief and practices of the Roman Catholic Church. For the Roman Catholic is there great comfort to be found in the idea that a particular belief or practice "has always been" believed or practiced by their Church. This is a major reason why non Catholics have such difficulty understanding how Catholics can believe and practice things that are obviously NOT FOUND in the Bible.

Under the Roman Catholic system, Bible authority is NOT ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. The Church teaches, believes it, and practices it, therefore it is true. Tradition is not so clear cut and obvious, actually it is rather obscure and the process whereby something becomes defined as a belief and practice of Roman Catholic tradition absolutely defines logic and sound reasoning.

WHAT IS TRADITION?

Trying to define "tradition" as it applies to the Roman Catholic Church is not as easy as it may seem. It is not a matter of merely looking in a book of Catholic belief and finding a definition. I looked in 5 different such books and found 5 different definitions. That should tell us something right at the beginning. The clearest definition I found, as well as one that encompasses the basics from the others, is from the book, The Roman Catholic Church, by John L. McKenzie, S.J. on p. 212. McKenzie states; "Tradition can be viewed as channel and as content, to use a modern phrase. As content, it is a body of doctrine Tradition as channel thus becomes the teaching authority, the only authentic spokesman of Roman Catholic belief. Tradition can therefore be called living, for at any given moment it exists in the teaching authority."

So tradition includes not only the body of belief and practice unique to Roman Catholicism, but also involves the teaching authority of the church itself at any given time enabling it to define further traditions.

The whole idea of tradition as it is now found in the Roman Catholic Church was NOT defined until 1546 by the Council of Trent, and then it was done to COUNTER the reformers of the Protestant Reformation who demanded scriptural authority for religious practices. The Council decreed: "seeing clearly that this truth and discipline are contained in the written books and the unwritten traditions which, received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the Apostles themselves, the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down even unto us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand, following the example of the orthodox Fathers, receives and venerates, with an equal affection of piety, all the books of the Old and New Testaments....and also the said traditions...preserved in the Catholic Church by a continuous succession." The Question Box, Rev. Bertrand L. Conway, p. 78).

You may have noticed in the decree by the Council of Trent that those traditions which they venerate equally with the Old and New Testaments are "preserved in the Catholic Church by a continuous succession." That is very important. In Roman Catholicism "no propo-sition can be declared an article of faith unless perpetual belief in the church can be affirmed of it." (The Roman Catholic Church, p. 212). Because of this, when the Roman Catholic teaching authority defines a new tradition as an article of faith, they teach that they are merely defining something that has already been believed by the Church. The devout Roman Catholic takes great comfort from that, I know that I did.

When solid evidence of "perpetual belief" is lacking, the Roman Catholic authorities merely FABRICATE IT. Let me give you a few note worthy examples. From the book, The Roman Catholic Church, p. 212, we find; "In the definition of the Mariological dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption, it was evident that literary evidence of these beliefs was LACKING for the earliest centuries. The Roman Catholic concluded from the literary evidence in which the beliefs are found that the beliefs were as old, at least in an implicit form, as the church itself, and thus was enabled to declare that these articles had always been believed in the church. The Roman Church, however, does not depend solely on literary and historical evidence; it depends on its own consciousness of its belief,...In the two dogmas mentioned, it was the consciousness of perpetual beliefs which are in harmony with these dogmas and which are themselves confirmed by these dogmas." Consider that quote.

As far as the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary are concerned, the Roman Catholic Church admits that there is NO EVIDENCE from the earliest centuries of the church that indicates that the early Christians, guided by the apostles and those who had known the apostles, believed in them. So they moved into literature from later centuries and there they believe that they found these dogmas at least implied. So they move forward on the ASSUMPTION that these later century Catholics must have gotten their ideas from someplace, so that proves that the Church always believed in these two dogmas. They then define the dogmas and their definition of them acts as final proof that the church "perpetually believed" in them. In other words essentially what the Church says is; we believe it now, we wouldn't make a mistake, so that means the church has always believed it despite the fact that there is NO EVIDENCE from the earliest centuries that they did. You can judge such reasoning for yourselves.

THE PROCESS.

What is the process whereby a tradition becomes defined and part of Roman Catholic teaching and dogma? The Roman Catholic answer demonstrates how far we must go to attempt to prove something that is not contained in God's Word. In truth, there is no set process or formula accepted and recognized by all Roman Catholic theologians. John L. McKenzie states in his book, The Roman Catholic Church, with surprising candor, the following; "Whatever be the process, it cannot be a process of deduction. Thomas Aquinas, by what he thought flawless logic, proved that Mary could not have been immaculately conceived; even the prince of theologians had his blind spots. Duns Scotus, by an argument which does not so much defy logic as ignore it, was convinced that she was. The Roman Church does not conceive that it arrives at such beliefs by logic...Regarding both the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption, the Roman Church, experienced a constant surging in itself toward the affirmation of these dogmas. At the risk of hypostatizing the institution, one can say that this surging, which went on for centuries before the declarations, gave the Roman Church a kind of inner compulsion to declare itself."

There you have it. Tradition, which is held with an equal degree of pious affection as is the Bible by the Roman Catholic Church, is arrived at NOT by logic and a reasonable consideration of the evidence, but by a constant SURGING within the Church itself to believe something. That is the same as saying that for a long time the church wanted to believe something, we now believe it, it must be true. Also, if we now believe it, that proves that the church always believed it.

My friends, that is just NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.


Kevin,

You must have loads of little funny, colourful tracts against the Most Holy Catholic Church. You are a typical enemy of THE ROCK ~ the 2000 year old Most Holy Catholic Church who has fought and annihilated so many heresies like yours for 2000 years.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


Rod,

I should have known.

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


James.
I should have warned you.

David.
I did warn you. You did turn over a new leaf at one time, remember?

Imagine all of us stranded on some deserted island with only one book, the Torah. What would happen then? We could lose sleep over that one.

rod..

..



-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 25, 2003.


James wrote, "You must have loads of little funny, colourful tracts against the Most Holy Catholic Church."

This is a TYPICAL answer for someone who does NOT have an answer from the Word of God!!!

James wrote, "...fought and annihilated so many heresies like yours for 2000 years."

My point EXACTLY!!! The Catholic Church CANNOT be the TRUE church for she is GUILTY of KILLING many innocent people just because they did NOT agree with her false doctrines. How many MILLIONS of people did the Catholic Church KILL during the Inquisition James???

Catholics CONVENIENTLY forget that we are to "...love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you," (Matthew 5:44).

Catholics CLAIM that they obey God's commandments, but they do LIE and NOT tell the truth for Romans 13:9-10 states, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law."

The TRUE church of Christ would NEVER harm their neighbor.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.


The Word of God was given to you by none other than the Most Holy Catholic Church in 382 AD.

All Catholics, me included, Love the Most Holy Word of God

But

We do not like people who Distort the Word of God like YOU. (you being one of the Worst Distorters ~ worse than Luther).

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 25, 2003.


James wrote, "The Word of God was given to you by none other than the Most Holy Catholic Church in 382 AD."

Sorry, James, I have to disappoint you, it was GOD who gave us His Word, NOT the Catholic Church.

James wrote, "All Catholics, me included, Love the Most Holy Word of God"

Dear readers, please notice that once again James makes an "assertion" but does NOT offer any proof that this is the case.

Jesus said in John 14:15, "If you love Me, keep My commandments."

Hebrews 11:6 says that he who comes to God MUST believe that He is.

Catholics claim that an infant can be saved without their own faith.

An infant CANNOT believe in God now can they?

In the same verse, God says that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

Once again, an infant DOES NOT have the capacity to do seek God now do they?

Galatians 3:26 says, "For you are all sons of God THROUGH FAITH in Christ Jesus."

Which infant is able to have faith?

To claim that one can be baptized without faith (as Catholics ASSERT) is to DENY Jesus meant what He said in His Word.

Jesus did NOT say He who is baptized and then believes will be saved, He said, "He who believes AND is baptized will be saved." (Mark 16:16).

Heaven is for every one who wants it and is willing to SUBMIT to God on HIS terms.

We need to remember that NO ONE gets to heaven by accident.

Those who are saved are saved because they were willing to SEARCH for the Lord's way and when they FOUND IT they were willing to OBEY the TRUTH, no matter what sacrifice might be involved.

God calls or draws men to Jesus THROUGH THE TEACHING OF HIS WORD, the GOSPEL (2 Thessalonians 2:14; John 6:44-45).

As you and I hear that gospel message, it is then up to us to either RECEIVE IT or REJECT IT.

What will your answer be James?

Are you right now a receiver or rejecter of the spiritual life and salvation that God offers you through Christ?

James wrote, "We do not like people who Distort the Word of God like YOU. (you being one of the Worst Distorters ~ worse than Luther)."

Once again, James like his Catholic brethren do a fine job of making assertions but little to no proof is offered to back them up. James expects everyone to believe that I "distort the Word of God" but offers NO proof NOR does he correct my "distortions". James CANNOT do this anyway since he needs a Catholic priest to EXPLAIN God's word to him since he is not able to UNDERSTAND the Bible on his own.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 25, 2003.


David. I did warn you. You did turn over a new leaf at one time, remember?

No rod, I don't remember. What do you mean?



-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 26, 2003.

Do you remember when you wanted your "Catholic bashing" posts deleted? I was also gonna make a link to the "Time for a change" thread.

rod..

..

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 26, 2003.


David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David David

[Image removed, Click here to view]

I tend to agree with you David,

when you said this to Kevin :

THE CHURCH OF CHRIST (denomination of) IS A DANGEROUS CULT WHOSE MEMBERS WERE DECEIVED BY SATAN ~

I know,

You were not attacking Kevin himself nor his entire church ~

but You were merely saying THE TRUTH

about Kevin and his entire church.

David,

we do have a point of agreement after all.

Peace.

[Image removed, Click here to view]

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 27, 2003.


Kevin,

Do you believe that their should be only one "church" in one city/town?

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), October 27, 2003.


I think God wants us all to be under one "Church".

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), October 27, 2003.

YOU ARE CORRECT, ROD ~ THE CHURCH IS ONE.

THE ROCK ~ THE 2000 YEAR OLD MOST HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH SAYS :

ONE ~ UNITY

The first characteristic of the Most Holy Catholic Church is her Unity. The office and person of the Pope means that the Church has One Supreme Head. One Deposit of Faith means One Set of Doctrines for the Entire Church ~ the Universal Catechism. Catholics on all continents everywhere in the world believe the Same Articles of faith. One Set of Laws, know as Canon Law, governs the Entire Church. The Code of Canon Law for the Western (Latin Rite) Church is different from the Eastern Rite (Byzantine) Church, yet both come from one and Same Source, the Pope, the Supreme Lawgiver. Both sets of Canon Law overlap each other in the most significant areas, so Continuity is kept. But whether you’re Roman Catholic or Eastern Catholic, you’re under the Authority of One Supreme Court, One Supreme Legislator, and One Supreme Judge, the Roman Pontiff ~ the Pope. One Set of Catholic rites, the Seven Sacraments, marking the seven stages of major development, and they’re celebrated the Same Way Everywhere. Worship services may be in different languages, but only Bread and Wine are used at every Mass; no one may substitute anything else, no matter what the culture is in that location.

The Unity of Liturgy, Doctrine, and Authority is a hallmark of Catholicism. Catholicism is unique in that Unity is personified in One Single Person, the Pope, who ensures that the same Seven Sacraments are celebrated Correctly all over the world, that the Same Set of Doctrines are taught everywhere and that every member, religious, lay, or clergy, Accept the Supreme Authority of the Bishop of Rome ~ The Pope. ~ Father Brighenti

MORE THAT 1 BILLION CATHOLICS WORLDWIDE ARE UNITED ~ ONE!



-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 27, 2003.


David,

No there doesn't have to be only one church in a town.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 28, 2003.


The following statement is typical of many that we hear: "There is one God and one Lord Jesus Christ.

There is only one Bible.

Why are there so many different churches?"

There are literally thousands of different religious organizations in the world today which claim to believe in Jesus Christ. The number of these organizations increases daily. It is not surprising that sincere seekers after truth are confused.

Our Lord prayed for the unity of all who would believe in Him. In John, chapter 17, verses 20 and 21, Jesus spoke to the Father these words: "Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us, that the world may believe that thou hast sent me."

Many turn away from Christ in confusion because of the many different churches which claim to be following Him today.

There are thousands of different churches in the world, but the Bible knows only one. Hear the inspired Apostle Paul: "There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is above all, and through all, and in you all" (Ephesians 4:4-6).

Please notice that "there is one body." That one body is the church. Please note that God "gave Him (Christ) to be the head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him that filleth all in all" (Ephesians 1:22,23). If the church is the body and there is one body, that means there is only one church which is approved by God. If there is but one church, then no man has any right to start another one.

In fact, none of the churches founded by men (the Catholic Church and all of the Denominations which came from her) have the approval of God. Our Lord Jesus Christ said: "Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up" (Matthew 15:14).

While our Lord Jesus Christ lived on this earth, He responded to Peter's confession, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God," by saying: "Upon this rock I will build my church" (Matthew 16:16-18). Please notice that Jesus used the singular. He did not say, "I will build my churches!" Nor did He promise to build many churches. He built only one! Because He is the Christ, the Son of the living God, He has the right to build the church. No one else can truthfully make the same claim. Therefore, no one else has the right to start a church or religious organization different from that one which Jesus built.

The church that Jesus built, the church of Christ, began on the first Pentecost following the resurrection and ascension of our Lord. We can read about its beginning in Acts, chapter 2.

Why not be content to become a member of Christ's church?

Follow the perfect pattern given for the church in the New Testament. Obey the same gospel which was preached on Pentecost day in the same way it was obeyed then and the same Lord will add you to the same church, the church of Christ!

You must believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 16:16; John 8:24). Repent of all your past sins (Acts 2:38; 17:30,31). Confess your faith in Christ (Romans 10:9-10; Acts 8:37). Be buried with Christ in baptism for the remission of your sins (Mark 16:16; Romans 6:4; Acts 2:38). You will thereby be added by the Lord to His one true church "...And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved" (Acts 2:47).

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), October 28, 2003.


Kevin, [Deleted by Moderator]

Kevin said, "You are correct, please forgive my error."

CURRENTLY, THERE ARE MORE THAN 1 BILLION FAITHFUL ADHERENTS TO THE 2000 YEAR OLD MOST HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THERE ARE ALREADY BILLIONS AND TRILLIONS OF CATHOLICS IN HEAVEN COMPARED TO YOUR SOLITARY ADHERENCE TO YOUR VERY OWN INVENTION, YOUR VERY OWN CONCOCTION, YOUR ONE-YEAR-OLD 34,0001ST UNINSPIRED ONE-MAN-DOCTRINE WITH MANY FLAWS DO NOT BE ALONE! JOIN THE MOST HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH!

-- james (elgreco1541@hotmail.com), October 28, 2003.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ