Pope Francis calls capitalism ‘a fallacious economic model’
Pope Francis, real name Jorge Bergoglio, is a neo-Marxist liberation theology adherent who, in May 2014, endorsed the redistribution of wealth by the state.
On July 9, 2015, he accepted from Bolivian socialist Evo Morales the sacriligious “Marxifix” — a crucifix in the shape of a hammer and sickle.
On May 3, 2019, speaking like the Green Nazi he is, Bergoglio blamed environmental degradation and the world’s poor on capitalism, calling it “a fallacious economic model that has been followed for too long”.
Catholic News Agency reports that Pope Francis made those remarks in an audience with 60 participants in the meeting, “Mining for the Common Good,” in the Apostolic Palace. The meeting was organized by the Vatican Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development. Mining industry executives from Latin America, Africa, Asia, and Canada participated in the meeting, along with Anglican, Methodist, and Catholic leaders “dedicated to development” — whatever that means.
In his remarks, Pope Francis blames the state of the world’s environment and of the poor (“the cry of the Earth and the cry of the poor”) on capitalism: “The precarious condition of our common home has been the result largely of a fallacious economic model that has been followed for too long” — an economic model that is “profit-oriented, shortsighted, and based on the misconception of unlimited economic growth,” which results in a “disastrous impact on the natural world.”
He said “We need a paradigm shift in all our economic activities” because capitalist economic powers “continue to justify the current global system where priority tends to be given to […] the pursuit of financial gain, which fail to take the context into account, let alone the effects on human dignity and the natural environment.”
If Pope Francis thinks the solution of the world’s environmental problems is to replace the “outmoded” economic model of capitalism with socialism, he is only displaying his ideological blindness and gross ignorance. Does he not know that, in addition to a human toll in the hundreds of millions, socialism/communism is an unmitigated disaster on the environment? As examples:
East Germany: At the time of its reunification with West Germany an estimated 42% of East Germany’s moving water and 24% of its still waters were so polluted that they could not be used to process drinking water; almost half of the country’s lakes were dead or dying and unable to sustain fish or other forms of life; 44% of its forests were damaged by acid rain. Sten Nilsson, a Swedish forest ecologist, described East Germany as “on the verge of total ecological collapse.” (The Federalist) Poland and Romania: Children from the Upper Silesia area of Poland had five times more lead in their blood than children from Western European cities. In some areas of Romania, the air was heavily polluted that horses were only allowed to stay for two or three years. (1992 Cato Journal paper)
Soviet Union: A 1996 study by the Library of Congress found that post-Soviet Russia’s air was “among the most polluted in the world”; 75% of its surface water was polluted; 50% of all water was not potable (drinkable). Then there is the Chernobyl nuclear reactor disaster, one of numerous episodes of serious environmental damage which plagued the Soviet nuclear sector. Less known than Chernobyl is a 1957 explosion at the Mayak nuclear reactor, which resulted in “long-term contamination of an area of more than 800 to 20,000 square kilometers” with 10,000 people forced to evacuate and an unknown number of deaths. (Wikipedia) The Soviet fleet — the largest nuclear-powered navy in the world — sometimes disposed of reactors by simply dumping them into the ocean.
China: Thousands of dead, bloated pigs floating down the river that supplies Shanghai with its drinking water. Air pollution in Beijing so impenetrable the U.S. Embassy’s air quality measuring station can only call it “beyond index.” Industrial towns where rates of cancer are so high they’re known as “cancer villages.” More than half of China’s surface water is so polluted it cannot be treated to make it drinkable; one-quarter of it is so dangerous it can’t even be used for industrial purposes. About 1 million square miles of China is now under desertification — that’s about one-quarter of the country’s total land surface, spread across 18 provinces. (Live Science)
Colin Grabow, a policy analyst based in Washington, DC, points out that the environmental destruction associated with communism is no coincidence or accident of history, but rather a logical outcome of political authoritarianism, an absence of private property rights, and capitalism’s production of wealth and technology. His rebuttal to Pope Francis would be:
There is no society, nor has one ever existed, which featured zero pollution or harm to the environment. The only question is how best to manage it, and which system is best positioned to accomplish this. On that question the answer is surely capitalism, home to the world’s richest countries and cleanest environments. It isn’t even close.
See also:
Pope Francis ‘grieves’ over death of Fidel Castro who persecuted Catholics & lived in luxury while Cubans starved Pope Francis calls for a new global authority to combat ‘climate change’ Despotism: Bishop adviser to Pope Francis claims papal infallibility over climate change Pope Francis donates $½ million to aid migrant invaders ‘stranded’ in Mexico Francis: The pope who refuses to genuflect at the consecration Pope Francis’ Vatican: a cesspool of pedophiles and homosexuals ~Eowyn
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
Given the "status" of the Catholic church nowadays, he's certainly not doing them any favors with many of his radical views. Seems to be a good fit though when you think about it, given the path they've gone down the past 10 years or so.
Get a clue. As the nationally acclaimed psychiatrist proclamed on Fox during 0s first term, when EVERYTHING the guy does is detrimental, its not an accident.
Given the "status" of the Catholic church nowadays, he's certainly not doing them any favors with many of his radical views. Seems to be a good fit though when you think about it, given the path they've gone down the past 10 years or so.
not trying to disrespect anyone's views......but it is hard for me...to see why one would chose to be catholic ……..bob
Get a clue. As the nationally acclaimed psychiatrist proclamed on Fox during 0s first term, when EVERYTHING the guy does is detrimental, its not an accident.
Given the "status" of the Catholic church nowadays, he's certainly not doing them any favors with many of his radical views. Seems to be a good fit though when you think about it, given the path they've gone down the past 2000 years or so.
Given the "status" of the Catholic church nowadays, he's certainly not doing them any favors with many of his radical views. Seems to be a good fit though when you think about it, given the path they've gone down the past 10 years or so.
not trying to disrespect anyone's views......but it is hard for me...to see why one would chose to be catholic ……..bob
0bama was our president & I'm still American too. You?
It’s such a simple concept to grasp: if you cannot accumulate wealth for yourself based on your own effort, and are guaranteed support by the state, then there’s zero motive to be productive or provide needed services, resulting in a command economy and ultimate collapse. It’s so simple that you have to suspect it’s proponents of evil intent.
The pope is the devil incarnate, along with all his pedophile priests.
Could be. More likely he's somebody ill equipped to do his job and is in over his head. I tend to beleive the devil is brighter than this guy, but guess that could be idea....
Get a clue. As the nationally acclaimed psychiatrist proclamed on Fox during 0s first term, when EVERYTHING the guy does is detrimental, its not an accident.
It’s such a simple concept to grasp: if you cannot accumulate wealth for yourself based on your own effort, and are guaranteed support by the state, then there’s zero motive to be productive or provide needed services, resulting in a command economy and ultimate collapse. It’s so simple that you have to suspect it’s proponents of evil intent.
Especially when you are expected, nay required, to deliver said wealth or "overage" to those less inclined.
Pope Benedict is a coward for abdicating his responsibilities. He was appointed and accepted the responsibility for life. Pope Francis is a Marxist and an antipope. He should be executed by the faithful for his defamation of the papacy. He was appointed by homosexual cardinals in the hierarchy that should be richly punished for their crimes. The Catholic church has been coopted by miscreants as is often the case when man is looked on as deity.
The papacy isn't biblical in any way shape or form, so nothing the guy says or does surprises me. Wasn't that long ago that he signed an 'agreement' with the muzzies...
Given the "status" of the Catholic church nowadays, he's certainly not doing them any favors with many of his radical views. Seems to be a good fit though when you think about it, given the path they've gone down the past 10 years or so.
not trying to disrespect anyone's views......but it is hard for me...to see why one would chose to be catholic ……..bob
0bama was our president & I'm still American too. You?
I was born an American.....I chose not to be catholic...bob
Warning that in places like Europe that mass migration will have irreversible consequences for the Church and culture, Cardinal Sarah said, "All migrants who arrive in Europe are penniless, without work, without dignity...This is what the Church wants?...The Church can not cooperate with this new form of slavery that has become mass migration. If the West continues in this fatal way, there is a great risk that, due to a lack of birth, it will disappear, invaded by foreigners, just as Rome has been invaded by barbarians.”
As Fox notes, he told a French media outlet that for example..."Poland, a Catholic country that has strict immigration policies, and said he had urged it not to sacrifice its Polish and Catholic identities 'on the altar of a technocratic and stateless Europe.'
It’s such a simple concept to grasp: if you cannot accumulate wealth for yourself based on your own effort, and are guaranteed support by the state, then there’s zero motive to be productive or provide needed services, resulting in a command economy and ultimate collapse. It’s so simple that you have to suspect it’s proponents of evil intent.
And yet nothing is said about US parishoners being forced into slavery by the politicians it supports (paying for steak, OJ, shrimp, etc for welfare recipients) while at the same time expected to enrich the coffers of Rome.
Given the "status" of the Catholic church nowadays, he's certainly not doing them any favors with many of his radical views. Seems to be a good fit though when you think about it, given the path they've gone down the past 10 years or so.
not trying to disrespect anyone's views......but it is hard for me...to see why one would chose to be catholic ……..bob
0bama was our president & I'm still American too. You?
The pope is the devil incarnate, along with all his pedophile priests.
Could be. More likely he's somebody ill equipped to do his job and is in over his head. I tend to beleive the devil is brighter than this guy, but guess that could be idea....
Hrumphhh, when someone screws things up over and over again, it aint by accident.
He's the obummer of the fellowship of Rome. It was time for someone from his neighborhood to have a turn. theological political correctness proven wrong.
I am not a Catholic. Many people are in my town. Most of them good decent people. This pope doesn't fit the kind of people they are. This guy needs to be removed.
I was baptized a Roman Catholic, although I have not considered myself as one for decades. The pedo's and the Catholic hierarchy's refusal to rid the church of such negates it as legit religion in my view. What can you believe in anymore?
This pope is so far out of line with past teachings of the church that he should be removed.
The pope, and just about every institution that used to be respected, has left morals, truth and justice in tatters. Almost all that was good has been compromised.
Maybe it has always been so and my age and experiences are just now allowing me to realize it. At this point the only thing I am sure of is that there is a difference between good and evil. I see this pope in the wrong column.
The pedos came in when the homosexuals intentionally mass infiltrated the Roman Catholic seminaries in the 1950s, and eventually took control of them, turning them into homo priest factories. What we call pedos are actually male homosexuals who like boys.
A pedophile is an adult with an depraved sexual attraction for children of either sex. The majority of them want the opposite sex but the homo pedo's want the same sex.
There are plenty of sexual deviants in the leadership of the Catholic Church these days. I don't have a lot of respect for this pope, he's got some funny ideas, for sure. But what do you expect from a Jesuit, especially a South American one? Those types have a history of being pretty !@#$% up...
A pedophile is an adult with an depraved sexual attraction for children of either sex. The majority of them want the opposite sex but the homo pedo's want the same sex.
Yep. That was my point. They're actually just homos who like them young.
well, i am a cradle catholic, since childhood. I started having difficulties in a catholic school by about the seventh grade. my dad was always good at giving me the other side of the story. I am still what i call a small "c" catholic, will always be one. Meaning i am a christian, just not in love with the burocracy of the roman catholic church. I consider this pope to be a south american communist social revolutionary, and quite possibly the antichrist. Having said that be careful to define ROMAN catholic, there are probably fifteen other varieties. Personally i identily much closer with the greek orthodox, or russian orthodox variety.
Thisi pope is a lying hypocrite who does not practice what he preaches. Otherwise he would sell off some of the Vatican's fabulous wealth and give the money to the poor.
Thisi pope is a lying hypocrite who does not practice what he preaches. Otherwise he would sell off some of the Vatican's fabulous wealth and give the money to the poor.
I don't think the Pope actually owns that stuff. That would be like Trump selling some of the historic amenities in the White House.
The pope's wrong, unfettered capitalism is the way to go. [sarcasm]
Ten hour work days, six day weeks, get sick and miss a day and you're unemployed, a truly minimum subsistence wage (if the kids and wife work too), no benefits of any kind, child labor, unsafe working conditions, maiming and death if you dare complain and try to organize, and so on. See Industrial Revolution, particularly in England.
Will agree a lot of those guys go too far but it's not of evil intent. They are pretty big on that love your neighbor thing.
Thisi pope is a lying hypocrite who does not practice what he preaches. Otherwise he would sell off some of the Vatican's fabulous wealth and give the money to the poor.
So how would that work, saw up the Sistine Chapel and sell off Michelangelo in pieces?
Thisi pope is a lying hypocrite who does not practice what he preaches. Otherwise he would sell off some of the Vatican's fabulous wealth and give the money to the poor.
So how would that work, saw up the Sistine Chapel and sell off Michelangelo in pieces?
That's a pretty piss-poor analogy. If you even have half a brain, you know that the Catholic Church is one of the richest entities on the face of the earth. Look at all these bishops and arch-bishops with multi-million dollar homes in the USA. You call them salt of the earth? Hypocrite. Here's a question for you: Would Jesus say it's OK to bugger little boys, or sodomize each other, for that matter? Yet that is just what so many of your 'leaders' do. So don't try to tell us that the Pope gives a good damn about anybody except his own power.
The pope's wrong, unfettered capitalism is the way to go. [sarcasm]
Ten hour work days, six day weeks, get sick and miss a day and you're unemployed, a truly minimum subsistence wage (if the kids and wife work too), no benefits of any kind, child labor, unsafe working conditions, maiming and death if you dare complain and try to organize, and so on. See Industrial Revolution, particularly in England.
Will agree a lot of those guys go too far but it's not of evil intent. They are pretty big on that love your neighbor thing.
That's the way is was in the US in years past. That's why the unions got strong. They were needed at the time. The problem is that after the problems were fixed, they couldn't give up their power and wealth.
So what about the dopey popey 700 or so years ago who decided pastors shouldnt get no nookie?
I submit he was a pretty fughked up cookie.
the reason for that was that any accumulated wealth by the priests would pass to the church and not to heirs. and it was marriage that was banned not getting nookie. and yeah .....pretty fughked up!
Maybe some bishops live in mansions in big cities where a lot of rich people donate big time to the diocese. Ours lives in drafty old stone house that was built along with the cathedral before my dad was born. As do all the other priests at the cathedral. Don't know what this bishop drives but the last one drove a cheap junker. A local car dealer trid to give him a new car but he refused, telling the car dealer to donate the value to the poor. Politically way too left for me, but he was true to his beliefs.
The Church does own a lot of property in Europe. I suppose they could sell it all off and give the proceeds to the poor, a one shot deal. Or continue to manage the property and annually give to the poor in perpetuity.
So you think the pope promotes sexual abuse of minors and homosexuality? Are you mad?
there are a lot of differences in priests and their vows. a missionary priest i was acquainted with took a vow of poverty, he had squat. on the other hand, a parish priest in stead of fixing the roof on the church, bought big screen t.v.'s for himself, expensive vacations, also for favorites working for the parish, later moved to scottsdale where he got in the big bucks then quit, and became an episcopal. i have known a number of married catholic priests, having been married prior to becoming a catholic priest coming over from lutheran etc.
In recent times, the Catholic Church has become more of a business institution, than a religious institution, that seeks to save lost souls. That is what led to the blind eye on the homosexual priests. As long as "Father John" was fattening the coffers of the Church, it didn't matter how many little boys he diddled. Most Catholics are happy, just as long as they get to sip their booze, and believe that saying "Father, I have sinned," and then being told to say three "Hail Mary's", will get them into Heaven.
Always amazingly easy to prescribe sacrifices to other people.
It's never amazingly easy to understand what you mean. Are you suggesting I am prescribing sacrifices for other people? If so, what sacrifices and for who?
Always amazingly easy to prescribe sacrifices to other people.
It's never amazingly easy to understand what you mean. Are you suggesting I am prescribing sacrifices for other people? If so, what sacrifices and for who?
More like the man is suggesting that the idiot pope and others of his ilk seem far to quick to have others sacrifice and tighten their belt whilst remaining seated at the banquet table themselves.
Which is par for the course for those lefty types.
Always amazingly easy to prescribe sacrifices to other people.
It's never amazingly easy to understand what you mean. Are you suggesting I am prescribing sacrifices for other people? If so, what sacrifices and for who?
More like the man is suggesting that the idiot pope and others of his ilk seem far to quick to have others sacrifice and tighten their belt whilst remaining seated at the banquet table themselves.
Which is par for the course for those lefty types.
How many billions in land, stocks, gold, commercial property,.....?
Not really going to matter much in the long term as now they will have to do someting about the kiddy fiddlers, which shall pretty much put a stop to peds signing up and becoming franchisees.
Guessing they will need another business model, which is probably why the twits are going full-blown commie in an attempt at street cred with the third world.
If this is true, Ricky, its kind of scarey. I do think Lucifer has entered into all of our organized religious institutions to some degree or the other and i think all will fall to him in the near future, Jimma Carter and the American Baptist Church being his minions as well as the Methodists and Episcopaleans.
"Catholic" Christians, get out while there's still time. It's an oxymoron. The catholic leadership is corporately a false prophet and will burn. Don't let them take you along.
I'm not Catholic, but if I were, I'd really have to question if I would stay one or investigate other paths. This Pope is a nutjob from day one. Any Pope that promotes a godless ideology like Socialism, has to be off his rocker.
Don't know about that but he might kiss your feet. Seems he's taken a biblical gesture to a (just nuts) high art.
Pope kisses feet of South Sudan’s leaders to encourage peace
But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in heaven. 34Do not assume that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn ‘A man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.…
vi. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ; nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God.
The biblical doctrine of the church revolves around Jesus Christ. He is the head of the church, which is His body, and He must have the preeminence (Col. 1:18). He has supreme authority (Col. 2:10). The church submits to Him as its Lord (Eph. 5:22-24). He is the source of our life (Eph. 4:15-16). When men claim to follow Christ but really follow their own personal notions or traditions and manmade rules and forms of worship, they are not holding the Head (Col. 2:18-23). Christ must always be first, or we have ceased to be the church of Christ.
One of the great heresies of the Roman Catholic Church is their exaltation of a man to the place of Christ. The Pope or Bishop of Rome takes the title "Vicar of Jesus Christ," meaning that he acts as Christ's representative, ruling as the supreme head of the church on earth. He is also called "Pontifex Maximus," meaning supreme or great high priest (Lev. 21:10, Vulgate), but the Bible says our great high priest is Jesus, the Son of God (Heb. 4:14). Invoking the authority of Peter, the Pope claims to speak infallibly on matters of faith or life, placing his own words on the level of the words of Christ.
It may surprise modern readers that the Westminster Confession calls the Pope the Antichrist. Today the Antichrist is popularly conceived to be a great military leader who will rule the world with supernatural powers. But in the Scriptures, the word antichrist is used of false teachers who deny fundamental teachings of the faith. John wrote, "Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists" (1 John 2:18; cf. 2:22; 4:3; 2 John 7).
The Lord Jesus warned that "false Christs, and false prophets" will come (Matt. 24:24). Paul foretold that the coming of the "man of sin, the son of perdition" who would exalt himself to the place of God in the temple (2 Thess. 2:3-4). The Westminster divines believed (and make a good case for their beliefs in their frequent writings on this subject!) that the office of the Papacy (not any one individual Pope) fulfilled these prophecies, asserting its claim to rule the universal church, which is the New Testament temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16).
Thus the Westminster Confession closes its chapter on the church with a solemn warning. Christ alone is the head of His church. He who dares to usurp Christ's place becomes an enemy of Christ. The confession of the true church has ever been, "Jesus is Lord!" It was this conviction that led early Christians to choose death rather than to worship the emperor of Rome, and the same conviction strengthens the church in every age. The blessed hope of the church is the return of her King, and her prayer is ever, "Come, Lord Jesus!"
Dr. Joel Beeke is the President and Professor of Systematic Theology and Homiletics at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary and pastor of Heritage Netherlands Reformed Congregation in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
The pope's wrong, unfettered capitalism is the way to go. [sarcasm]
Ten hour work days, six day weeks, get sick and miss a day and you're unemployed, a truly minimum subsistence wage (if the kids and wife work too), no benefits of any kind, child labor, unsafe working conditions, maiming and death if you dare complain and try to organize, and so on. See Industrial Revolution, particularly in England.
Will agree a lot of those guys go too far but it's not of evil intent. They are pretty big on that love your neighbor thing.
That's the way is was in the US in years past. That's why the unions got strong. They were needed at the time. The problem is that after the problems were fixed, they couldn't give up their power and wealth.
Always amazingly easy to prescribe sacrifices to other people.
It's never amazingly easy to understand what you mean. Are you suggesting I am prescribing sacrifices for other people? If so, what sacrifices and for who?
Im afraid at the end of the day many will find they sacrificed to the wrong father. The nonbelievers will know their fate as they approach the White Throne of Judgement.
It wont be them who will be surprised and gnashing teeth at finding they cast His words away for those of Jose.
Many will come in my name....
Some will say I am on the Mount or that i am in the inner sanctum.
Pinch yourself. If you are a believer and can feel it, He aint here.
Always amazingly easy to prescribe sacrifices to other people.
It's never amazingly easy to understand what you mean. Are you suggesting I am prescribing sacrifices for other people? If so, what sacrifices and for who?
More like the man is suggesting that the idiot pope and others of his ilk seem far to quick to have others sacrifice and tighten their belt whilst remaining seated at the banquet table themselves.
Which is par for the course for those lefty types.
Just a few points and opinions... I was raised a Byzantine Rite (Eastern) Catholic. My father was Ukrainian and mother Slovak. Our priests have always been allowed to marry and you don't hear about pedophilia in the Eastern Rite. It may be there but nowhere near as much as in the Roman Rite. There are two kinds of priests-- Order priests and diocesan priest. Order priest are usually monks first, such as Franciscans and Benedictines and take a vow of poverty and live a much simpler life. Diocesan priests are sent to the seminary and made priests by their diocese. They seem to be the main culprits in the scandal. Here is how I think it all came about. "Little Jimmy" is raised in a strict Catholic family and realizes after puberty that he has "sick" thoughts. He likes little boys. He decides on a course of action that he believes will "kill two birds with one stone". He decides to become a priest. This will make his religious family proud of him and get rid of the question of why he doesn't like girls/women. He also believes that since he devoting his life to God, God will make him stop having these perverted thoughts. The problem is, he's in the seminary and the thoughts don't stop. He discusses it with his fellow friend seminarians and finds that a sizable minority of them also think the same way. They form a pact to protect each other as they rise through the ranks. They are a large enough group that even the individual "straight" priests are too afraid to confront them. Soon, some are bishops and cardinals and nobody messes with them. Even the dioceses that have "named names" haven't released any from the past 10-15 years, the ones whose statute of limitations hasn't run out yet. They're still protecting each other. That's why I've become an "independent religious person". I still act like a moral person but don't really feel the need to belong to any organized religion.
vi. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ; nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God.
The biblical doctrine of the church revolves around Jesus Christ. He is the head of the church, which is His body, and He must have the preeminence (Col. 1:18). He has supreme authority (Col. 2:10). The church submits to Him as its Lord (Eph. 5:22-24). He is the source of our life (Eph. 4:15-16). When men claim to follow Christ but really follow their own personal notions or traditions and manmade rules and forms of worship, they are not holding the Head (Col. 2:18-23). Christ must always be first, or we have ceased to be the church of Christ.
One of the great heresies of the Roman Catholic Church is their exaltation of a man to the place of Christ. The Pope or Bishop of Rome takes the title "Vicar of Jesus Christ," meaning that he acts as Christ's representative, ruling as the supreme head of the church on earth. He is also called "Pontifex Maximus," meaning supreme or great high priest (Lev. 21:10, Vulgate), but the Bible says our great high priest is Jesus, the Son of God (Heb. 4:14). Invoking the authority of Peter, the Pope claims to speak infallibly on matters of faith or life, placing his own words on the level of the words of Christ.
One of the great heresies of the Roman Catholic Church is their exaltation of a man to the place of Christ. The Pope or Bishop of Rome takes the title "Vicar of Jesus Christ," meaning that he acts as Christ's representative, ruling as the supreme head of the church on earth. He is also called "Pontifex Maximus," meaning supreme or great high priest (Lev. 21:10, Vulgate), but the Bible says our great high priest is Jesus, the Son of God (Heb. 4:14). Invoking the authority of Peter, the Pope claims to speak infallibly on matters of faith or life, placing his own words on the level of the words of Christ.
It may surprise modern readers that the Westminster Confession calls the Pope the Antichrist. Today the Antichrist is popularly conceived to be a great military leader who will rule the world with supernatural powers. But in the Scriptures, the word antichrist is used of false teachers who deny fundamental teachings of the faith. John wrote, "Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists" (1 John 2:18; cf. 2:22; 4:3; 2 John 7).
The Lord Jesus warned that "false Christs, and false prophets" will come (Matt. 24:24). Paul foretold that the coming of the "man of sin, the son of perdition" who would exalt himself to the place of God in the temple (2 Thess. 2:3-4). The Westminster divines believed (and make a good case for their beliefs in their frequent writings on this subject!) that the office of the Papacy (not any one individual Pope) fulfilled these prophecies, asserting its claim to rule the universal church, which is the New Testament temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16).
Thus the Westminster Confession closes its chapter on the church with a solemn warning. Christ alone is the head of His church. He who dares to usurp Christ's place becomes an enemy of Christ. The confession of the true church has ever been, "Jesus is Lord!" It was this conviction that led early Christians to choose death rather than to worship the emperor of Rome, and the same conviction strengthens the church in every age. The blessed hope of the church is the return of her King, and her prayer is ever, "Come, Lord Jesus!"
Dr. Joel Beeke is the President and Professor of Systematic Theology and Homiletics at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary and pastor of Heritage Netherlands Reformed Congregation in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Sounds like the snowflakes and SJWs like what he has to say.
BTW, you really arent being seriius, are you?
Like, if Trump were saying people who believe in Christ are dangerous loonies we would be expected to just ignore that?
The pope doesnt know the Word. He doesnt know the Bible. He leads people astray.
People with guns cant be Christian. Lord said get a sword.
Church doesnt give a crsp if their subjects live on welfare. God said provide for you and yours or I am not in you.
Are you fine with having bro and sis christians not knowing HE is not in them?
He runs on all the time about world peace. HE said He didnt come to bring peace on Earth. He came to give us personal peace. If your cbruch buds live on welfare and have the false peace of thinking the pope has cleared things in heaven for them and he hasnt, are you not concerned for them?
vi. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ; nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God.
The biblical doctrine of the church revolves around Jesus Christ. He is the head of the church, which is His body, and He must have the preeminence (Col. 1:18). He has supreme authority (Col. 2:10). The church submits to Him as its Lord (Eph. 5:22-24). He is the source of our life (Eph. 4:15-16). When men claim to follow Christ but really follow their own personal notions or traditions and manmade rules and forms of worship, they are not holding the Head (Col. 2:18-23). Christ must always be first, or we have ceased to be the church of Christ.
One of the great heresies of the Roman Catholic Church is their exaltation of a man to the place of Christ. The Pope or Bishop of Rome takes the title "Vicar of Jesus Christ," meaning that he acts as Christ's representative, ruling as the supreme head of the church on earth. He is also called "Pontifex Maximus," meaning supreme or great high priest (Lev. 21:10, Vulgate), but the Bible says our great high priest is Jesus, the Son of God (Heb. 4:14). Invoking the authority of Peter, the Pope claims to speak infallibly on matters of faith or life, placing his own words on the level of the words of Christ.
One of the great heresies of the Roman Catholic Church is their exaltation of a man to the place of Christ. The Pope or Bishop of Rome takes the title "Vicar of Jesus Christ," meaning that he acts as Christ's representative, ruling as the supreme head of the church on earth. He is also called "Pontifex Maximus," meaning supreme or great high priest (Lev. 21:10, Vulgate), but the Bible says our great high priest is Jesus, the Son of God (Heb. 4:14). Invoking the authority of Peter, the Pope claims to speak infallibly on matters of faith or life, placing his own words on the level of the words of Christ.
It may surprise modern readers that the Westminster Confession calls the Pope the Antichrist. Today the Antichrist is popularly conceived to be a great military leader who will rule the world with supernatural powers. But in the Scriptures, the word antichrist is used of false teachers who deny fundamental teachings of the faith. John wrote, "Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists" (1 John 2:18; cf. 2:22; 4:3; 2 John 7).
The Lord Jesus warned that "false Christs, and false prophets" will come (Matt. 24:24). Paul foretold that the coming of the "man of sin, the son of perdition" who would exalt himself to the place of God in the temple (2 Thess. 2:3-4). The Westminster divines believed (and make a good case for their beliefs in their frequent writings on this subject!) that the office of the Papacy (not any one individual Pope) fulfilled these prophecies, asserting its claim to rule the universal church, which is the New Testament temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16).
Thus the Westminster Confession closes its chapter on the church with a solemn warning. Christ alone is the head of His church. He who dares to usurp Christ's place becomes an enemy of Christ. The confession of the true church has ever been, "Jesus is Lord!" It was this conviction that led early Christians to choose death rather than to worship the emperor of Rome, and the same conviction strengthens the church in every age. The blessed hope of the church is the return of her King, and her prayer is ever, "Come, Lord Jesus!"
Dr. Joel Beeke is the President and Professor of Systematic Theology and Homiletics at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary and pastor of Heritage Netherlands Reformed Congregation in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
I've always wondered how much money the Church actually gives to charity and how much is just "flow through" money that people donate to Catholic charities. I bet money from Church investments isn't much.
Sure, the pope has no special insight into political natters. I'm sure there are some loony leftist Catholics that think he does, but they were loony leftists to begin with. I don't know any. Everybody I know says "Can you believe what the pope did this time?" (like shoe kissing). Then shake their heads and go about their business.
The pope doesn't know the Bible? Funny, he's been studying it most of his life. Can't be a Jesuit if you don't.
Given the "status" of the Catholic church nowadays, he's certainly not doing them any favors with many of his radical views. Seems to be a good fit though when you think about it, given the path they've gone down the past 10 years or so.
not trying to disrespect anyone's views......but it is hard for me...to see why one would chose to be catholic ……..bob
The Catholic church is more than what the commie Pope is espousing. The precepts and sacraments of the Church are still valid and necessary. While we believe the Pope is infallible, this one is acting in concert with the devil. We can still practice our faith while he promotes socialism and world chaos. Another analogy comes to mind which involves a baby and bath water.
I should add that many do not choose to be a Catholic as in making a conscious decision as a child. Many are born to it and either choose to remain faithful, drift away or totally reject it.
Are you too brainwashed and blind to see the truths put forward in The Word in the efw post? Or are you being intentionally obtuse? Can you not read and comprehend?
Do you insist the parishioners are to worship the Church rather than Him?
Well, He said He would blind your eyes.
…17From the rest he makes a god, his graven image. He bows down to it and worships; he prays to it and says, “Save me, for you are my god.” 18They cannot comprehend or understand, for He has shut their eyes so they cannot see, and closed their minds so they cannot understand. 19And no on
The Church does own a lot of property in Europe. I suppose they could sell it all off and give the proceeds to the poor, a one shot deal. Or continue to manage the property and annually give to the poor in perpetuity.
I learned when Notre Dame Catheral burned, that the great catherals in France have been the property of the state since the French Revolution.
The Church does own a lot of property in Europe. I suppose they could sell it all off and give the proceeds to the poor, a one shot deal. Or continue to manage the property and annually give to the poor in perpetuity.
I learned when Notre Dame Catheral burned, that the great catherals in France have been the property of the state since the French Revolution.
DF
Yep, they stole them. Same as England did after Henry VIII established the Anglican Church. They stole all Catholic Church owned property in England.
Where do you get this stuff? The creed we pray at every mass begins, "I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth...." Is it really so hard to distinguish between Father capital F and father small f?
Where do you get this stuff? The creed we pray at every mass begins, "I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth...." Is it really so hard to distinguish between Father capital F and father small f?
Stick with the capital “F” father and you won’t go wrong.
While we believe the Pope is infallible, this one is acting in concert with the devil.
So acting in concert with satan is infallible in the eyes of God, who is the only One who matters?
Romans 3:10-12 New King James Version (NKJV)
10 As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one; 11 There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God. 12 They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one.”
But the catholic masses say this mere man, just another sinner, is infallible?
Quote
We can still practice our faith while he promotes socialism and world chaos.
But if catholics believe him to be the infallible leader, then he IS your faith; speaking only that and leading only in the way God has him do. But he is not that. You cannot worship two masters. It's either God the infallible or the pope infallible. And as scripture tells us, there are none on earth infallible (righteous).
John 14:6 New King James Version (NKJV) cul 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
The pope has nothing at all to do with your faith or salvation.
Quote
.....that many do not choose to be a Catholic as in making a conscious decision as a child. Many are born to it and either choose to remain faithful, drift away or totally reject it.
If you are catholic, you choose to be catholic, as in making a conscious decision; just as could be your conscious choice to leave a cult led by a false prophet and come to the Father thru Jesus. No one else is coming, no one else is here. It's just Jesus, him alone. And accepting the reality of Jesus Christ, who he is, and who is the Father, is the only way to a relationship with the Holy Trinity and eternity in Heaven.
I say none of this from hatred or self righteousness. Though ridicule may come, I say these things as I am led. The longer I live and the shorter time I have left here, the more I value the admonition to voice the Gospel, the Good News, that Jesus Christ is "the way, the truth and the life". It's not complicated. God loves us and He sent his Son as a showing of that love. He's telling us to just accept Him as our Creator and to accept the plan He has for our life here on earth and for our eternal life through Jesus Christ. As Jesus said:
John 14 New King James Version (NKJV) The Way, the Truth, and the Life
14 “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 In My Father’s house are many [a]mansions; if it were not so, [b]I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. 4 And where I go you know, and the way you know.”
Nothing about the pope, his underlings, HIS mansions and private kingdom, or his supposed infallibility. And nothing about preachers or deacons. On the contrary it's all about the personal relationship with God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. The decision is ours. The choice is whether or not we accept the reality and infallibility of God, not the pope or any other mortal. Again, it's just Jesus. No one else is coming, no one else is here. It is Him and Him alone that can take us to the Promised Land.
Presuming you misunderstand, the Pope is considered infallible only on certain doctrinal issues. Other than that he's just a guy. A scholarly person and leader of the Church on earth inherited from Peter with the best of intentions and due great respect and deference but human.
This is based on scripture though you may interpret differently. The Pope is infallible in that he is inspired by the Holy Spirit as were the apostles after Jesus arose, or as conventionally thought the writers of scripture. You do see the Bible as infallible, right?
Sure, the pope has no special insight into political natters. I'm sure there are some loony leftist Catholics that think he does, but they were loony leftists to begin with. I don't know any. Everybody I know says "Can you believe what the pope did this time?" (like shoe kissing). Then shake their heads and go about their business.
The pope doesn't know the Bible? Funny, he's been studying it most of his life. Can't be a Jesuit if you don't.
Like most geeks that specialise in a particular subject, the majority erroneously believe that they excell in all matters...when in reality a jack-of-all-trades has a better broad based understanding of the world and the problems experienced there-in.
Basically he is an arrogant socialist geriatric ƒuckwit.
Problem is, NH, that you accept the pope is off the mark re his political views. In the previous couple of pages we have demonstrated that his religious views are also contradictory to scripture. And you accept that, yet that is what you persist in worshipping, which means you reject worshipping the Father you believe in (Christ) while insisting on worshipping the father who rejects Christs Word for his own word.
You have here described a cult and demand your alliegence to it, not Him. You worship the church when the church (his believers) are instructed to worship Him. I have seen the pope say you must wordhip the church. Did he hypnotize you?
Matt24:2 take heed that no MAN decieve you.
For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before."- Matthew 24:24,25.
Satan is using men to deceive fellow men and this he does via " great signs and wonders" and also unsound doctrines. In this he arises ffalse prophets, counterfeit prophets. The question we must ask, where do these counterfeit prophets and teachers arise? The Bible is explicit: "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you."- 2 Peter 2:2. These individuals arise among the professed Christians, he is not some blasphemous atheist from somewhere. And other than miracles what do they do? Listen to what Peter continue to say, "and through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you." verse 3, They will what? They will make money out of you.
Given the "status" of the Catholic church nowadays, he's certainly not doing them any favors with many of his radical views. Seems to be a good fit though when you think about it, given the path they've gone down the past 10 years or so.
not trying to disrespect anyone's views......but it is hard for me...to see why one would chose to be catholic ……..bob
The Catholic church is more than what the commie Pope is espousing. The precepts and sacraments of the Church are still valid and necessary. While we believe the Pope is infallible, this one is acting in concert with the devil. We can still practice our faith while he promotes socialism and world chaos. Another analogy comes to mind which involves a baby and bath water.
I should add that many do not choose to be a Catholic as in making a conscious decision as a child. Many are born to it and either choose to remain faithful, drift away or totally reject it.
The previous popes acted in concert with the devil, also. It just wasnt so in your face.
While we believe the Pope is infallible, this one is acting in concert with the devil.
So acting in concert with satan is infallible in the eyes of God, who is the only One who matters?
Romans 3:10-12 New King James Version (NKJV)
10 As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one; 11 There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God. 12 They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one.”
But the catholic masses say this mere man, just another sinner, is infallible?
Quote
We can still practice our faith while he promotes socialism and world chaos.
But if catholics believe him to be the infallible leader, then he IS your faith; speaking only that and leading only in the way God has him do. But he is not that. You cannot worship two masters. It's either God the infallible or the pope infallible. And as scripture tells us, there are none on earth infallible (righteous).
John 14:6 New King James Version (NKJV) cul 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.
The pope has nothing at all to do with your faith or salvation.
Quote
.....that many do not choose to be a Catholic as in making a conscious decision as a child. Many are born to it and either choose to remain faithful, drift away or totally reject it.
If you are catholic, you choose to be catholic, as in making a conscious decision; just as could be your conscious choice to leave a cult led by a false prophet and come to the Father thru Jesus. No one else is coming, no one else is here. It's just Jesus, him alone. And accepting the reality of Jesus Christ, who he is, and who is the Father, is the only way to a relationship with the Holy Trinity and eternity in Heaven.
I say none of this from hatred or self righteousness. Though ridicule may come, I say these things as I am led. The longer I live and the shorter time I have left here, the more I value the admonition to voice the Gospel, the Good News, that Jesus Christ is "the way, the truth and the life". It's not complicated. God loves us and He sent his Son as a showing of that love. He's telling us to just accept Him as our Creator and to accept the plan He has for our life here on earth and for our eternal life through Jesus Christ. As Jesus said:
John 14 New King James Version (NKJV) The Way, the Truth, and the Life
14 “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 In My Father’s house are many [a]mansions; if it were not so, [b]I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. 4 And where I go you know, and the way you know.”
Nothing about the pope, his underlings, HIS mansions and private kingdom, or his supposed infallibility. And nothing about preachers or deacons. On the contrary it's all about the personal relationship with God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. The decision is ours. The choice is whether or not we accept the reality and infallibility of God, not the pope or any other mortal. Again, it's just Jesus. No one else is coming, no one else is here. It is Him and Him alone that can take us to the Promised Land.
Problem is, NH, that you accept the pope is off the mark re his political views. In the previous couple of pages we have demonstrated that his religious views are also contradictory to scripture.
And there I find your interpretation of scripture in error.
For a Catholic worshiping a pope or anyone/thing except God, would be heresy. They would no longer be Catholic. Don't know why that's so hard to get across.
So we believe that the Holy Spirit metaphorically whispers in the ear of the pope on certain doctrinal matters. Protestants, at least some of them, believes He whispers in the ear of everyone that picks up a Bible. Others believe He whispers in the ear of their favorite pastor, but not others.
Then there's the Bible, His word. How do you know the people who put it on parchment got it right? Maybe the Holy Spirit whispered in their ears?
With all this whisperin going on why is it so hard to conceive of the pope being included? Just because you don't like his politics?
Problem is, NH, that you accept the pope is off the mark re his political views. In the previous couple of pages we have demonstrated that his religious views are also contradictory to scripture.
And there I find your interpretation of scripture in error.
Then there's the Bible, His word. How do you know the people who put it on parchment got it right? Maybe the Holy Spirit whispered in their ears?
With all this whisperin going on why is it so hard to conceive of the pope being included? Just because you don't like his politics?
So thats how you justify him not following scripture? Maybe the Bible is wrong and we need to go by what the pope said God whispered in his ear? YGBSM.
So then you follow someone who believes or acts contrary to His written word and yet you still think you arent rejecting His Word for that of a mortal man? Youre following (worshipping) the mortal, not God.
God said the Bible is His holy word. He gave it to us as our instruction for life on earth and everlasting life.
Can you not understand scripture?
"There are none good" "There is none who do good". Is HE a liar and the pope truth?
Can you not mentally comprehend His words og warning here:
Matt24:2 take heed that no MAN decieve you.
For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before."- Matthew 24:24,25.
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you."- 2 Peter 2:2. These individuals arise among the professed Christians, he is not some blasphemous atheist ...
I submit He was right, men will be blinded by satan who comes in Gods name.
The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 2Cor 4:4.
You have been seduced into worshipping a man in a cult which uses satan as its member getter.
May God bless you as your needs may be and may He have mercy on your soul. Amen
For the zillionth and last time, certain of the pope' teachings on doctrine are considered infallible and nothing else. Not his political opinions or opinion on the price of tea. And here's a secret,not his picks at the dog track either. He's never won a trifecta.
For the zillionth and last time, certain of the pope' teachings on doctrine are considered infallible and nothing else. Not his political opinions or opinion on the price of tea. And here's a secret,not his picks at the dog track either. He's never won a trifecta.
From what i have seen he couldn't win an argument.
Why don't you and tzone fill us in on the crucial things that supercede having a communist antichrist at the helm of the Catholic church?
Ricky, i think you are more scripturally knowledgeable and more capable of doing that that than myself.
All i could offer is read the Bible and pray for guidance and dont let someone else distract you with their idea or fallible interpretation.
[/quote] Would have been quicker to say, "I don't know", because truly I don't know what would be worse than having a church, any church, be led by the antichrist.
To base the power of a mortal man, his infallibility on any issue, his ability to intervene with God on your behalf, and to elevate himself as King of the Vatican, control billions of dollars based on these assumed extra powers granted by God on the two scriptures quoted is insane. Smoke and mirrors. Dance around the cult all you wish. The pope is undeserving of worship. And crowds rushing the coach to kiss his ring is worship of the world, not of God. To kiss the ring of a priest, referring to him as father, to confess sins to a mortal man, to depend on the prayers of others to make you right with God, none of this is Biblical..To a pope or his underlings infallible in any way is a total absurdity. Accepting this false worship and false divinity is heresy on the part of catholic leadership.
As far as whether or not I accept the infallibility of the Bible? I accept the infallibility of the one and only Holy Father and he is not a pope. He is the Master of the universe and dictated a record of his dedication to his children, His acts of support in what is our Old Testament, and His INFALLIBILITY in guiding the record of Jesus Christ in our New Testament.. There is nothing in either part of our Bible granting Peter the devine inspiration and divine support of God to build the catholic church.
We all as Believers are instructed in prayerful support of one another, and to live our lives in pursuit of righteousness, to be effective in our prayerful petitions to God in prayer. In the book of James:
James 5:14-16 King James Version (KJV)
14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:
15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.
16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
This removes all doubt prayer matters. But not prayers of the self appointed infallibles. Instead, the prayers of those seeking righteousness. The pope, any pope past, present, future, has no more influence wtih God than the most humble among us. And I personally am led to believe he is the pharasee of the Christian world. Proud in title, intentionally obvious in his actions, and hiding more than any but God will ever know.
And then there is the issue of sexual conduct within the catholic hierarchy. The attraction of such an institution that prohibits the natural God designed and blessed relationship between man and woman, based on past and present actions by those in authority is an incredible attraction to the very group of males God found to be an abomination. The management plan of the catholic organition is perfectly designed for those males who deny the Godly attraction of man for woman and woman for man. Instead it encourages those who choose to live according to what is God's abomination. This is a known way of life among those who share it under the pretense of serving God. There will be no forgiveness. It is openly tolerated. That alone is enough to show not only is the pope, the cardinals, the bishops and the priests part and parcel of this abomination to God, but enough to show the organization in total operates outside the direction of God. May the Holy Spirit bring to you the wisdom of God and the love of Jesus to make the truth believable.
That's about enough of me on this. I'll leave it to others here on out.
You are blessed to be able to compose thatand will be blessed for standing up for Him and Truth. It was a blessing to get to read it and efw also.
Nitehawk has presented a heroic effort, if not a scripturally sound one, for the pope. I fear he will hear the Lord ask him why havent you done as much for me.
Was a nice post but so factually wrong on Catholic doctrine I wouldn't know where to begin. The argument is fine but get your facts straight. I wasn't trying to defend the idea of a pope, lots of people can do it better, so much as to point out those mistakes. Believe what you will, but base your belief on accurate information. Not on myth fed to you by someone trying to convince you to follow them. (My favorite is that Catholics worship statues, always gives me a laugh.)
It's all out there, there are no Catholic secrets.
Was a nice post but so factually wrong on Catholic doctrine I wouldn't know where to begin. The argument is fine but get your facts straight. I wasn't trying to defend the idea of a pope, lots of people can do it better, so much as to point out those mistakes. Believe what you will, but base your belief on accurate information. Not on myth fed to you by someone trying to convince you to follow them. (My favorite is that Catholics worship statues, always gives me a laugh.)
It's all out there, there are no Catholic secrets.
I have no problem with a denomination of Christianity having a religious hierarchy and pampered leadership...I have a real problem when that arsehole attempts to interfere with the way I live my life...it seems every time this çunt opens his mouth he wants me and mine to give something up so that some other turd can have more.
Here is a suggestion, if the prick wants others to have more then how about he and his ilk do with less and keep their fingers out of what is mine.
So I worship a man, Jesus, in a cult started by Jesus himself? I'm jiggy with that.
Christian faith is not up for debate, the nitwit that claims to be God's rep on Earth is.
Bingo...........That's the way I see it to. I do not believe that when you commit a sin that a man can tell you to say three Hail Mary's, and you will be forgiven of that sin. There is only one way you are forgiven of your sins, and it ain't through a Pope or a priest.
Its painfully obviuos as far as some are concerned that the Bible is of no real value as long as there are church elders the Lord can whisper to. Its pretty scary as to the extent of mind control some have been indoctrinated to. Its quite Satanic that the Bibles words have no impact on a believers philosophy. If the pope disagrees with the Word then to hell with it. How telling. So in fact, who is bowed down to, the pope or the Lord?
I do not believe that when you commit a sin that a man can tell you to say three Hail Mary's, and you will be forgiven of that sin. There is only one way you are forgiven of your sins, and it ain't through a Pope or a priest.
Another misconception. God forgives sins. He does that through the priest.
Its painfully obviuos as far as some are concerned that the Bible is of no real value as long as there are church elders the Lord can whisper to. Its pretty scary as to the extent of mind control some have been indoctrinated to. Its quite Satanic that the Bibles words have no impact on a believers philosophy. If the pope disagrees with the Word then to hell with it. How telling. So in fact, who is bowed down to, the pope or the Lord?
We shouldn't be so provincial. ALL Catholic doctrine is rooted in scripture. If you Google up "Catholic Catechism" it'll give you the references. Just because it's an interpretation of scripture you may not like...
I do not believe that when you commit a sin that a man can tell you to say three Hail Mary's, and you will be forgiven of that sin. There is only one way you are forgiven of your sins, and it ain't through a Pope or a priest.
Another misconception. God forgives sins. He does that through the priest.
Was a nice post but so factually wrong on Catholic doctrine I wouldn't know where to begin.
They are ate up with Jack Chick.
That, and the whole mess is so diffused by the over 4,000 Protestant denominations/beliefs/interpretations that it is impossible to get a coherent sense of what Babel is saying.
Its painfully obviuos as far as some are concerned that the Bible is of no real value as long as there are church elders the Lord can whisper to. Its pretty scary as to the extent of mind control some have been indoctrinated to. Its quite Satanic that the Bibles words have no impact on a believers philosophy. If the pope disagrees with the Word then to hell with it. How telling. So in fact, who is bowed down to, the pope or the Lord?
We shouldn't be so provincial. ALL Catholic doctrine is rooted in scripture. If you Google up "Catholic Catechism" it'll give you the references. Just because it's an interpretation of scripture you may not like...
Rooted in and follows sctipture is 2 different things.
2 Timothy All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.
Do you know what ALL means? It means any words that disagree are not truth or correct or from HE.
Either He is a liar or you and the church is. Its really that simple and youre so brainwashed you cant pass Christianity 101.
How can He say it for you to understand? Call no one on earth father (little f) .....
JamesJr, That's not how it works, but that would be a long discussion. Anyway, it's sill God that does the forgiving.
Jesus paid the price for me to go boldly before the Throne of God with no intermediary necessary. I've been doing that for some time now. About 65 years.
I do not believe that when you commit a sin that a man can tell you to say three Hail Mary's, and you will be forgiven of that sin. There is only one way you are forgiven of your sins, and it ain't through a Pope or a priest.
Another misconception. God forgives sins. He does that through the priest.
No.....there is not a "Middleman".
A priest is by definition a middleman (intercessor; mediator) who is now, according to the very plan words of Hebrews, unnecessary.
Hebrews 4:14
Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. 15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.
5 For every high priest chosen from among men is appointed to act on behalf of men in relation to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. 2 He can deal gently with the ignorant and wayward, since he himself is beset with weakness. 3 Because of this he is obligated to offer sacrifice for his own sins just as he does for those of the people. 4 And no one takes this honor for himself, but only when called by God, just as Aaron was.
5 So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him,
“You are my Son, today I have begotten you”; 6 as he says also in another place,
“You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek.” 7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus[a] offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. 8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. 9 And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, 10 being designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek. (Esv)
The whole book of Hebrews outlines the many ways that Christ is better than the Judaic order under the old covenant. He is not only better but He is said to be the substance of that which those former things were the shadow.
The reality has come; the precursor or “type” is useless.
Pointless.
Yes, even evil or, as my previous post said, “anti-Christ”.
Probably those darn Jesuits in college. You know, the guys who read scripture in Greek and Aramaic. You can miss a lot of nuance and context translating to English. How many different versions of the bible are out there now?
efw, Good morning. It's hard to put it into a short message but a Catholic priest is ordained, authorized, to act in the stead of God as were the apostles. Can only God perform miracles? Yes. Did the apostles perform miracles? Yes, after the Pentecost. They were ordained or given the authority through the Holy Spirit.
Careful tying too tightly to the Old Testament. Old covenant / new covenant.
efw, Good morning. It's hard to put it into a short messagebut a Catholic priest is ordained, authorized, to act in the stead of Godas were the apostles. Can only God perform miracles? Yes. Did the apostles perform miracles? Yes, after the Pentecost. They were ordained or given the authority through the Holy Spirit.
Careful tying too tightly to the Old Testament. Old covenant / new covenant.
And you don't see the problem with that statement.
from my point of view, i am a small c catholic, meaning i believe in the basic doctrine, not so much in the structure of the roman catholic church. greek, russian, or some of the others i am much closer too. but what really makes me chuckle is people on here quoting scripture from the KING JAMES version of the bible, written how many years after the time of Christ? Then there are the transcription issue of the documents themselves many written after the time of Christ and translated into a number of languages before they even got to english. Yeah, right. And as one pointed, out how many different protestant groups are there today, all saying it's my way or the highway, Jack? Bible thumpers give me indigestion.
from my point of view, i am a small c catholic, meaning i believe in the basic doctrine, not so much in the structure of the roman catholic church. greek, russian, or some of the others i am much closer too. but what really makes me chuckle is people on here quoting scripture from the KING JAMES version of the bible, written how many years after the time of Christ? Then there are the transcription issue of the documents themselves many written after the time of Christ and translated into a number of languages before they even got to english. Yeah, right. And as one pointed, out how many different protestant groups are there today, all saying it's my way or the highway, Jack? Bible thumpers give me indigestion.
Which leads to my favourite saying..."paper will take šhit".
from my point of view, i am a small c catholic, meaning i believe in the basic doctrine, not so much in the structure of the roman catholic church. greek, russian, or some of the others i am much closer too. but what really makes me chuckle is people on here quoting scripture from the KING JAMES version of the bible, written how many years after the time of Christ? Then there are the transcription issue of the documents themselves many written after the time of Christ and translated into a number of languages before they even got to english. Yeah, right. And as one pointed, out how many different protestant groups are there today, all saying it's my way or the highway, Jack? Bible thumpers give me indigestion.
Fair enough, but the implication that the Roman Catholic Church is monolithic is a false one. There are many, many factions within that institution which render that argument null & void.
By the way... historic Protestants are truly little-c catholic. We believe in the catholicity or universality of the invisible church... all those who are truly saved.
I for one believe that there is a whole host of people in that group; some there because of the faithful message of the tradition (or anti-tradition) in which they participate on this side of the grave, others in spite of it. It is God who saves; His message of salvation in Christ goes forth in spite of mans best efforts.
efw, Good morning. It's hard to put it into a short messagebut a Catholic priest is ordained, authorized, to act in the stead of Godas were the apostles. Can only God perform miracles? Yes. Did the apostles perform miracles? Yes, after the Pentecost. They were ordained or given the authority through the Holy Spirit.
Careful tying too tightly to the Old Testament. Old covenant / new covenant.
And you don't see the problem with that statement.
Really?
Guess I could have added they at in His name, not on their own, but that seems pretty obvious to me. So you think the apostles were a bunch of posers?
Guess I could have added they at in His name, not on their own, but that seems pretty obvious to me. So you think the apostles were a bunch of posers?
If you want to play that game, then yes I do in fact think the apostles were not and are not God.
And yes...I also think that catholics are idolaters, which I also think is encouraged by the thieves and paedophiles in charge to further their own ends.
And if you don't like what I think then don't bother conversing with me as there is no hope in hell I am ever going to be convinced otherwise.
The thievery is demonstrable in the vatican franchise, as is the paedophilia.
Deny it all you like...just like all the other good catholics.
Fair enough, but the implication that the Roman Catholic Church is monolithic is a false one. There are many, many factions within that institution which render that argument null & void.
There a set of core beliefs which all Catholics hold, defines being Catholic. Start with the Nicene Creed. After that there are all kinds of ways to worship. There are other teachings which in good conscience you may or may not choose to follow.
Given half a chance the most pious will denounce another for being "different"
Go ahead and be Catholic if you want too.....sheesh.
I’m not Catholic; turned it down a long time ago.
There is a big difference between denouncing ideas and men as you well know.
Unless you’re denouncing us for arguing about this stuff, which I assume you’re not. I assume you feel there are better things to argue about perhaps? If so that’s your call.
The fact remains that Christianity is imbedded in the values of the West. The very fact we can have these conversations and not fear for our lives from repercussions of our opinions by the govt or our tribes is owed to Christian ideals. As much as people wrongly suggest we’d all kill each other given the chance that’s simply not the case.
I have far more I agree with nighthawk on than disagree. Ghat doesn’t mean we can’t spar. I’d break bread and hang with him happily; and I’m confident he would me.
Given half a chance the most pious will denounce another for being "different"
Go ahead and be Catholic if you want too.....sheesh.
I’m not Catholic; turned it down a long time ago.
There is a big difference between denouncing ideas and men as you well know.
Unless you’re denouncing us for arguing about this stuff, which I assume you’re not. I assume you feel there are better things to argue about perhaps? If so that’s your call.
The fact remains that Christianity is imbedded in the values of the West. The very fact we can have these conversations and not fear for our lives from repercussions of our opinions by the govt or our tribes is owed to Christian ideals. As much as people wrongly suggest we’d all kill each other given the chance that’s simply not the case.
I have far more I agree with nighthawk on than disagree. Ghat doesn’t mean we can’t spar. I’d break bread and hang with him happily; and I’m confident he would me.
You, on the other hand...
(That’s a joke...)
Christianity is not the issue, one man setting himself up as God's mouthpiece is, particularly when he delves in to realms he has no business venturing in to.
Fair enough, but the implication that the Roman Catholic Church is monolithic is a false one. There are many, many factions within that institution which render that argument null & void.
There a set of core beliefs which all Catholics hold, defines being Catholic. Start with the Nicene Creed. After that there are all kinds of ways to worship. There are other teachings which in good conscience you may or may not choose to follow.
We hold to all the catholic creeds.
Liberation theologians, abundant in the RCC, use the language of Catholicism but don’t mean the same thing. They’re not Roman Catholic, yet enjoy it’s communion. Same for other sorts of liberals. There are factions within the Church who render the “you Protestant disagree” argument null & void.
Christianity is not the issue, one man setting himself up as God's mouthpiece is, particularly when he delves in to realms he has no business venturing in to.
I don’t know how I could more clearly demonstrate I agree than what I’ve posted in this thread.
Given half a chance the most pious will denounce another for being "different"
Go ahead and be Catholic if you want too.....sheesh.
I’m not Catholic; turned it down a long time ago.
There is a big difference between denouncing ideas and men as you well know.
Unless you’re denouncing us for arguing about this stuff, which I assume you’re not. I assume you feel there are better things to argue about perhaps? If so that’s your call.
The fact remains that Christianity is imbedded in the values of the West. The very fact we can have these conversations and not fear for our lives from repercussions of our opinions by the govt or our tribes is owed to Christian ideals. As much as people wrongly suggest we’d all kill each other given the chance that’s simply not the case.
I have far more I agree with nighthawk on than disagree. Ghat doesn’t mean we can’t spar. I’d break bread and hang with him happily; and I’m confident he would me.
You, on the other hand...
(That’s a joke...)
Christianity is not the issue, one man setting himself up as God's mouthpiece is, particularly when he delves in to realms he has no business venturing in to.
Christianity isn’t the issue........”christians” are.
Folks telling other folks that their deeply held beliefs are wrong or silly or dangerous or going to send them to hell...........is not a slippery slope......there is no slope.....its straight down.
Folks telling other folks that their deeply held beliefs are wrong or silly or dangerous or going to send them to hell...........is not a slippery slope......there is no slope.....its straight down.
All are free to believe as they will, but when they discuss it on an open forum they put their beliefs under scrutiny and have no business getting the pips about any dissenting view.
Appreciate that efw. Thank the Greeks for rational debate. I like it, have to review my beliefs as well as the other guys and it's a sad day if I don't learn something along the way. It is possible to respect someone and their beliefs without accepting those beliefs. There are major disagreements but as Christians we're walking the same path.
Appreciate that efw. Thank the Greeks for rational debate. I like it, have to review my beliefs as well as the other guys and it's a sad day if I don't learn something.It is possible to respect someone and their beliefs without accepting those beliefs.
It had better be or there is no hope for our species.
Folks telling other folks that their deeply held beliefs are wrong or silly or dangerous or going to send them to hell...........is not a slippery slope......there is no slope.....its straight down.
Folks telling other folks that their deeply held beliefs are wrong or silly or dangerous or going to send them to hell...........is not a slippery slope......there is no slope.....its straight down.
You got that right.
So tell me, what about gays, abortionists, paedophiles, socialists...and other such. Does the same extend to their beliefs, or can we fervently detest what they stand for if we feel the desire.
JamesJr, That's not how it works, but that would be a long discussion. Anyway, it's sill God that does the forgiving.
Jesus paid the price for me to go boldly before the Throne of God with no intermediary necessary. I've been doing that for some time now. About 65 years.
Yes. Ricky is right. One does not need an intermediary.
Folks telling other folks that their deeply held beliefs are wrong or silly or dangerous or going to send them to hell...........is not a slippery slope......there is no slope.....its straight down.
You got that right.
So tell me, what about gays, abortionists, paedophiles, socialists...and other such. Does the same extend to their beliefs, or can we fervently detest what they stand for if we feel the desire.
What about the blanket statement that Liberalism is a mental disorder?
from my point of view, i am a small c catholic, meaning i believe in the basic doctrine, not so much in the structure of the roman catholic church. greek, russian, or some of the others i am much closer too. but what really makes me chuckle is people on here quoting scripture from the KING JAMES version of the bible, written how many years after the time of Christ? Then there are the transcription issue of the documents themselves many written after the time of Christ and translated into a number of languages before they even got to english. Yeah, right. And as one pointed, out how many different protestant groups are there today, all saying it's my way or the highway, Jack? Bible thumpers give me indigestion.
Fair enough, but the implication that the Roman Catholic Church is monolithic is a false one. There are many, many factions within that institution which render that argument null & void.
By the way... historic Protestants are truly little-c catholic. We believe in the catholicity or universality of the invisible church... all those who are truly saved.
I for one believe that there is a whole host of people in that group; some there because of the faithful message of the tradition (or anti-tradition) in which they participate on this side of the grave, others in spite of it. It is God who saves; His message of salvation in Christ goes forth in spite of mans best efforts.
to me you are basically repeating what i said, that there are many different versions of catholicism, roman is only one. and i also call myself a small c catholic for another reason, that is the meaning universal. which covers a lot of the protestant groups. few years ago i attended services for a jewish friend of mine, first time ever in a temple. They said kaddish, which i had heard in hebrew many times. This time i heard it in english. I was going wait a minute, that is the same as the catholic prayer for the dead. Then i realized who stole what from whom. I don't put much into somebody trying to tell me the right way. You are either christian in some form or you are not. The not's are mostly shown by that dog cult called islam. I know pretty much from a young age all the sins of the roman catholic church. I also knew a lot of really good people, like the nuns who mostly educated me. but all groups have their issues, it's called humanity. I think the pope only declared himself infallable on church doctrine in the 1800's. I don't believe in that either.
JamesJr, That's not how it works, but that would be a long discussion. Anyway, it's sill God that does the forgiving.
Jesus paid the price for me to go boldly before the Throne of God with no intermediary necessary. I've been doing that for some time now. About 65 years.
Jesus Christ is in Heaven at this very moment pleading fervently for you and me. He is our intermediary.
If mortal sinning men could be, there would have been no need for him.
I do not believe that when you commit a sin that a man can tell you to say three Hail Mary's, and you will be forgiven of that sin. There is only one way you are forgiven of your sins, and it ain't through a Pope or a priest.
Another misconception. God forgives sins. He does that through the priest.
No.....there is not a "Middleman".
A priest is by definition a middleman (intercessor; mediator) who is now, according to the very plan words of Hebrews, unnecessary.
Hebrews 4:14
Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. 15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.
5 For every high priest chosen from among men is appointed to act on behalf of men in relation to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. 2 He can deal gently with the ignorant and wayward, since he himself is beset with weakness. 3 Because of this he is obligated to offer sacrifice for his own sins just as he does for those of the people. 4 And no one takes this honor for himself, but only when called by God, just as Aaron was.
5 So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him,
“You are my Son, today I have begotten you”; 6 as he says also in another place,
“You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek.” 7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus[a] offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. 8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. 9 And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, 10 being designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek. (Esv)
The whole book of Hebrews outlines the many ways that Christ is better than the Judaic order under the old covenant. He is not only better but He is said to be the substance of that which those former things were the shadow.
The reality has come; the precursor or “type” is useless.
Pointless.
Yes, even evil or, as my previous post said, “anti-Christ”.
This ^^^^. NH saying God does not forgive is blasphemy.
1 John 1:9 if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness
Taking no side one way or the other but isn't it great that people can express their view toward the Pope or Catholics without being labeled "catholicphobes" or "Papists". Imagine the backlash if someone said these things about some Imam, a female leader or a minority.
Now where did I say that? Of course only God forgives sin. The offense is against Him. Say someone commits an offense against you. Can I forgive him? If I tried it would be meaningless.
The Lord said the Bible is the word of God. God said men are liars. The pope is a man and he is a liar. All us men are liars.
He is not a liar. Thats why we are directed to study, learn, know and live by the scripture. Jesus lived by the sctipture. He took his teaching from the scripture, not some scripture and men. He studied scripture and taught it to men that they could learn the good news and be saved.
Its sad to realize many of our brother believers think a preacher can suffice for the word because the word in scripture is Christ teaching us. Thats how we get to Him, not by listening to some men who are....you guessed it- liars.
It, Gods word, tells us no one comes to the Father except by him (Christ). God didnt say we get to him by a man or Christ and a man. The man, pope or priest or pastor cant get to Him except by Christ. Christ is our intercessor, not Christ and a mortal sinner, but teaching that idea can be used to enhance the take in the plate.
God gave us the word and the word is Jesus and the word is the way, the truth and the life, not the word and a pastor.
God forgives through our intercessor described in the Bible, Jesus Christ.
Sorry, NH, i thought i saw where you posted that God did not forgive sin without a priest.
This is BS and blasphemy. It directly contradicts Gods message in the Bible that is given us to direct out actions and
beliefs: "Another misconception. God forgives sins. He does that through the priest.".
God forgives sin. He does that through the sacrifice and cleansing blood Christ suffered and shed for us if we avail ourselves of it by asking forgiveness.
I know youve had false doctrine fed to you for ages, but read Gods word and ask him to open your eyes.
Hey, if you ask him to open your eyes its up to Him to do so, otherwise you are in the same boat as a kid who grew up in Iran every day being indoctrinated into believing you are blessed if you kill a Jew. You both believe and you both believe WRONG because you believe what youve been taught by lying men, not Him.
"I know youve had false doctrine fed to you for ages"
And after praying to Him over it for decades I'm sure I haven't.
But I'm still puzzling over:
In the Bible the Lord said the Bible is the word of God The Bible was written by men God said men are liars.
Huh? Doesn't that mean the first statement is a lie?
They were directed by Him and put down His message to us.
When you have several of them saying essentially the same thing there is evidrnce they were giving us His message as proof the Bible was His inspired word.
Then when you have some sucker saying dont build walls when he lives behind one or when He said to arm yourself and the man says get rid of your arms or when He says call no one father and the man says call me father, and when He says dont bring the heathen into your country i gave you and the man says have open borders and let all in then even the dumbasses are expected to get a clue.
When the man says He talks to me while He gave an incorrect message to you in the bible so you can listen to me instead of the bible He may expect you to get a clue.
Come on, defend His Word and not his word. He told you to take care you dont worship the unholy one.
How are you supposed to know the usurper, the pretender who comes in His name? You know by applying the Word in Scripture.
” 4Jesus answered, “See to it that no one deceives you. 5For many will come in My name, claiming, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many.…
17Now I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who create divisions and obstacles that are contrary to the teaching ( What teaching- the teaching in the Bible, the teaching of His word) you have learned. Turn away from them. 18For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive (and tell them they are saved?)19Everyone has heard about your obedience( to what,?His wordvor a mans word, cause they arent the same).,, so I rejoice over you. But I want you to be wise about what is good and innocent and what is evil.…
LEARN THE WORD AND DEFEND IT, NOT THE SINNER WHO BENT IT.
In the Bible the Lord said the Bible is the word of God The Bible was written by men God said men are liars.
Huh? Doesn't that mean the first statement is a lie?
If that were your assertion as a Roman Catholic it’d prove too much. Logically it would mean that your other authoritative source of revelation, Church tradition, is identically flawed.
This would leave you in the position of post modern followers of Schleiermacher who essentially gutted what we’d call historic Christianity (ie Christ’s power to save effectually) and left behind moralisms and worship with forms emptied of their substance. Ie the dead end of all relativistic roads, nihilism.
The Bible as we have it now was not around in Jesus's time, as far as I know, so how could Jesus say that the Bible is the word of God? Also, I thought it was Paul who said it, not Jesus , but it's been a while since I've read it so could be mistaken.
I think the Lord talks about innate knowledge that He gives men which covered them before the written word.
Not all have to believe in Jesus as savior to be saved. If you are enlightened to the Good News it seems you must acknowledge Christ as Savior and ask forgiveness of your sins. That is scripture.
Scripture does not say all who get to heaven have to be believers in Christ. Thats a modern and incorrect assumption.
He said all who get to the Father do so through Christ. He didnt say all have to accept Christ as Saviour.
Babies and kids who die before the age of accountability go to Heaven.They get there through Jesus Christ. He can do the same for those who died before the Good News.
He says all who do believe and call on His name and ask forgiveness and repent are saved. That doesnt mean it's the only way but it is a certain guranteed way. He can still send souls to God from thousands of years ago.
Matthew 18 provides a lot of enlightenment. First off, it clarifies what the "unforgivable sin" is -
Originally Posted by Matt 18
3 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
The sin against the Holy Spirit is the rejection of The Spirit. This is in spite of being baptized or Christ's sacrifice on the cross.
Second, it sheds light on the Church being an institution, not an individual thing.
Originally Posted by Matt 18
15 “If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
Also notice that this is in spite of any baptism of the offender or Christ's passion.
Then, along with 15-17, 18 illuminates some of the authority that not only goes along with the keys given to Peter in Matthew 16, but the priesthood in the order of Melchezidek. Taken with 15-17, you see this is the authority to mediate sins.
Originally Posted by Matt 18
18 “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
Originally Posted by Matt 16
19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
I think the Lord talks about innate knowledge that He gives men which covered them before the written word.
Not all have to believe in Jesus as savior to be saved. If you are enlightened to the Good News it seems you must acknowledge Christ as Savior and ask forgiveness of your sins. That is scripture.
Scripture does not say all who get to heaven have to be believers in Christ. Thats avmodern and incorrect assujption.
He said all who get to the Father do so through Christ.
Babies and kids who die before the age of accountability go to Heaven.They get there through Jesus Christ. He can do the same for those who died before the Good News.
He says all who do believe and call on His name and ask forgiveness and repent are saved. That doesnt mean it's the only way butbit is a certain guranteed way. He can still send souls to God from thousands of years ago.
That might be your gospel, small case "g", but I doubt many others would claim it. This is just confusing to many, I would believe, and primarily incorrect.
Of course, prior to the Lord's birth, people were saved by their faith. Just as they were after Jesus walked the earth: saved by Faith. Faith in the God of the Bible and Torah.
God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are One. Behold O'Israel the Lord thy God is One.
The Bible as we have it now was not around in Jesus's time, as far as I know, so how could Jesus say that the Bible is the word of God? Also, I thought it was Paul who said it, not Jesus , but it's been a while since I've read it so could be mistaken.
You think God cant still create or do things? Isnt He building us a place in Heaven? He didnt stop on the 7th day, He rested.
Darn, i guess He gave us the written word after people learned to make the written word.
I myownself was around for a while and did a lot of stuff before i started killing big bucks.
When was this herasey rewritten into the catechism telling us moslems can go to heaven without believing in Christ?
Oh yes, pope John Paul in the 1992. 841. The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."
In the Bible the Lord said the Bible is the word of God The Bible was written by men God said men are liars.
Huh? Doesn't that mean the first statement is a lie?
If that were your assertion as a Roman Catholic it’d prove too much. Logically it would mean that your other authoritative source of revelation, Church tradition, is identically flawed.
This would leave you in the position of post modern followers of Schleiermacher who essentially gutted what we’d call historic Christianity (ie Christ’s power to save effectually) and left behind moralisms and worship with forms emptied of their substance. Ie the dead end of all relativistic roads, nihilism.
I was just musing on the logic of the proposition, a philosophical car crash. Like the paradox: I always lie. And that's the truth.
When was this herasey rewritten into the catechism telling us moslems can go to heaven without believing in Christ?
Oh yes, pope John Paul in the 1992. 841. The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."
Just more of Satan leading Gods children astray.
As a child I was given this question: If you have to accept Jesus to be saved, what about the native in deepest, darkest Africa who is barely aware that there's an outside world much less Jesus. An otherwise good guy, does he go to hell? Is that the act of a mercirciful, loving and just god?
If that were your assertion as a Roman Catholic it’d prove too much. Logically it would mean that your other authoritative source of revelation, Church tradition, is identically flawed.
This would leave you in the position of post modern followers of Schleiermacher who essentially gutted what we’d call historic Christianity (ie Christ’s power to save effectually) and left behind moralisms and worship with forms emptied of their substance. Ie the dead end of all relativistic roads, nihilism.
I was just musing on the logic of the proposition, a philosophical car crash. Like the paradox: I always lie. And that's the truth.
Yeah I wondered which is why I put “if”.
Ultimately anyone so bold as to assert any really conclusions on the ultimate questions will fall back on a circular argument of one sort or another. They’re all “philosophical car crashes” so-to-speak, accept the ones that are easy & safe.
Ultimately anyone so bold as to assert any really conclusions on the ultimate questions will fall back on a circular argument of one sort or another. They’re all “philosophical car crashes” so-to-speak, accept the ones that are easy & safe.
As a child I was given this question: If you have to accept Jesus to be saved, what about the native in deepest, darkest Africa who is barely aware that there's an outside world much less Jesus. An otherwise good guy, does he go to hell? Is that the act of a mercirciful, loving and just god?
This sidesteps the most important question tho; why does God save ANYONE if He is just? We all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.
Man is by his nature fallen and sinful.
The fact that God would come in human form and sacrifice Himself for ANYONE is amazing.
As He said to Moses, He will have mercy upon whom He will have mercy.
Oh I dunno, suppose it's that love and mercy thing. He made us in His image and likeness, we are his children. I don't find us as despicable as that, more that we come into being knowing nothing and with much to learn. He made us knowing our nature, He does only good stuff, so we can't be all that bad.
Oh I dunno, suppose it's that love and mercy thing. He made us in His image and likeness, we are his children. I don't find us as despicable as that, more that we come into being knowing nothing and with much to learn. He made us knowing our nature, He does only good stuff, so we can't be all that bad.
If I brought you to a pool and dropped one eye dropper of the most poisonous chemical we’ve come up with in and told you to drink a cup would you do it? God is absolutely perfectly righteous & holy; not so much as a drop of unrighteousness is in Him.
You’re using yourself and your judgment as the measure but that isn’t what Scripture (or the Church for that matter) uses. Here is what He says about us:
Gen 6:5 The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. (ESV)
and that sin came through Adam, our first father:
Rom 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men[e] because all sinned (ESV)
Paul makes this point as it relates to the Mosaic law as well:
Gal 3:10 For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” (ESV)
And here is an implied question from Paul that I genuinely ask you:
Gal 2:21 I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.
If, as you suggest, “we can’t be all that bad,” why did Christ have to die?
Just to be clear; I assume you're not a Universalist so you draw the line somewhere. When you talk of us being not so bad or (as in the case of some) damnable you’re talking about law; that is, performance to a standard. You may be talking God’s Law or man’s, but in either instance Paul’s implied question applies; if salvific righteousness were available through (some) Law, why did Christ have to die?
But does that mean people are born evil? I think not, we choose evil, perhaps in ignorance. It gets into the dual nature of man which Aquinas talks about. We can revel in our animal nature with it's animal instincts or forego that in developing our transcendent self which I think is the "in His image and likeness" part.
But does that mean people are born evil? I think not, we choose evil, perhaps in ignorance. It gets into the dual nature of man which Aquinas talks about. We can revel in our animal nature with it's animal instincts or forego that in developing our transcendent self which I think is the "in His image and likeness" part.
Either way matters not; if we aren’t that bad why did Christ have to die?
When was this herasey rewritten into the catechism telling us moslems can go to heaven without believing in Christ?
Oh yes, pope John Paul in the 1992. 841. The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."
Just more of Satan leading Gods children astray. m
As a child I was given this question: If you have to accept Jesus to be saved, what about the native in deepest, darkest Africa who is barely aware that there's an outside world much less Jesus. An otherwise good guy, does he go to hell? Is that the act of a mercirciful, loving and just god?
Jesus has always been the Agent of salvation, before and after His incarnation. Nowhere does scripture claim that the recipient of salvation must be aware that Jesus of Nazareth is that Agent.
Simple logic demands that if there truly is only One God, any prayer made to any Deity will be heard by the Only Deity, regardless of the name applied by the one praying. That Deity, Jesus, will judge the sincerity of the request.
It’s only the Power Hungry Priests and some Elitist Protestants who insist on adding sacraments such as baptism or being in Communion with a church to the simple Gospel message. The very idea that Jesus would place the fate of His movement to a fallible human, St Peter, and establish an unbroken line of subsequent Peters is the greatest farce in Christendom.
It’s only the modern egoist who uses the Bible to support whatever his latest intellectual masturbation produces.
Simple logic demands that if there truly is only One God, any prayer made to any Deity will be heard by the Only Deity, regardless of the name applied by the one praying. That Deity, Jesus, will judge the sincerity of the request.
'
Pretty close to Catholic doctrine actually, stated differently,
Jesus has always been the Agent of salvation, before and after His incarnation. Nowhere does scripture claim that the recipient of salvation must be aware that Jesus of Nazareth is that Agent.
Originally Posted by curdog4570
It’s only the modern egoist who uses the Bible to support whatever his latest intellectual masturbation produces.
Love the internal consistency here. Classic.
Be that as it may it’s sure lucky you’re not judgmental of the religion of others. I mean THOSE people are HORRIBLE, ya know?
Nowhere does scripture claim that the recipient of salvation must be aware that Jesus of Nazareth is that Agent.
You've been skipping Sunday School again, it would appear.
Romans 10:9 New King James Version (NKJV) 9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
Nowhere does scripture claim that the recipient of salvation must be aware that Jesus of Nazareth is that Agent.
You've been skipping Sunday School again, it would appear.
Romans 10:9 New King James Version (NKJV) 9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
That’s a quote from the Apostle Paul; not a Gene-approved authority.
Besides, only Gene can call upon Scripture to support his arguments. Anyone else who does so is an “egoist”.
So let it be written; so let it be done. Gene hath spoken.
Its psychotic to think the writers of the Bible could have put untruths in the Bible since they were mere mortals and then believe the pope is scripturally infallable while he is also a mere mortal.
So, the Lord whispers to him but didnt whisper to Matthew, Mark, John, or the other story tellers who wrote the Bible.
But does that mean people are born evil? I think not, we choose evil, perhaps in ignorance. It gets into the dual nature of man which Aquinas talks about. We can revel in our animal nature with it's animal instincts or forego that in developing our transcendent self which I think is the "in His image and likeness" part.
We are born of the flesh. A baby cares not if you are tired or sleeping or whatever. When baby wants something it wants its way and right now, mr.
Its psychotic to think the writers of the Bible could have put untruths in the Bible since they were mere mortals and then believe the pope is scripturally infallable while he is also a mere mortal.
So, the Lord whispers to him but didnt whisper to Matthew, Mark, John, or the other story tellers who wrote the Bible.
It is my understanding that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that scripture is authoritative & true.
Unlike historic Protestants who believe the Church derives its authority from the Bible, RC teaches the opposite, that the Bible derives it’s authority from the Church, and that therefore the Church has the authority to interpret it.
I could be wrong and NH can correct me, but that’s my understanding.
To shed further light on this from a different point of view I’d suggest that a major difference between Roman Catholic & Historic Protestant philosophy is one of pre-modernism vs modernism, respectively. When you get into the radical Protestants like Curdog and many others (pretty much all of American Evangelicalism) you’re into post-modernism.
Just a thought I’ve had as I’ve pondered various approaches to religion... I could be wrong and am happy to entertain where that might be...
It is my understanding that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that scripture is authoritative & true.
If the RCC teaches that scripture is authoritative and true, then why didn't they follow it? The Bible says that if a brother has fallen away, bring him back with prayer and understanding. The RCC tore his arms off on the rack. The Bible says that the Jews are STILL God's chosen people, in spite of their disbelief. God will deal with them. The RCC burned them at the stake. The Bible says to search the scriptures for truth. For centuries, the RCC killed any one found with a Bible. One of the first Bible translators, William Tyndale, was strangled and burned at the stake for trying to bring the Bible to the people. I could go on.
It is my understanding that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that scripture is authoritative & true.
If the RCC teaches that scripture is authoritative and true, then why didn't they follow it? The Bible says that if a brother has fallen away, bring him back with prayer and understanding. The RCC tore his arms off on the rack. The Bible says that the Jews are STILL God's chosen people, in spite of their disbelief. God will deal with them. The RCC burned them at the stake. The Bible says to search the scriptures for truth. For centuries, the RCC killed any one found with a Bible. One of the first Bible translators, William Tyndale, was strangled and burned at the stake for trying to bring the Bible to the people. I could go on.
Like the killing of Baptist missionarys in South America near a hundred years ago?
It is my understanding that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that scripture is authoritative & true.
If the RCC teaches that scripture is authoritative and true, then why didn't they follow it? The Bible says that if a brother has fallen away, bring him back with prayer and understanding. The RCC tore his arms off on the rack. The Bible says that the Jews are STILL God's chosen people, in spite of their disbelief. God will deal with them. The RCC burned them at the stake. The Bible says to search the scriptures for truth. For centuries, the RCC killed any one found with a Bible. One of the first Bible translators, William Tyndale, was strangled and burned at the stake for trying to bring the Bible to the people. I could go on.
I am not RC but if you’d like to list things Christians have done that contradict our religion it seems intellectually dishonest to leave out the sins of Protestants.
Pray for repentance and faithfulness on all our parts; I live in a glass house so try to tread lightly.
The wars between Catholics and the Church of England were long and bloody. Neither side could hardly be called Christian. Between them, they broke every rule in the Bible many times over.
Also keep in mind that the Church of England wasn't founded for Christian reasons. Henry IIIV was essentially at war with the pope. He wanted an annulment from his wife and the pope wouldn't give him one. So, Henry started his own church for the purpose of violating God's laws. The church was created in sin from the very start.
Also keep in mind that the Church of England wasn't founded for Christian reasons. Henry IIIV was essentially at war with the pope. He wanted an annulment from his wife and the pope wouldn't give him one. So, Henry started his own church for the purpose of violating God's laws. The church was created in sin from the very start.
Unlike historic Protestants who believe the Church derives its authority from the Bible, RC teaches the opposite, that the Bible derives it’s authority from the Church, and that therefore the Church has the authority to interpret it.
Semantics aside, all doctrine is rooted in the Bible. Of course the Church interprets it, anyone who reads it interprets it, else it may as well be a random jumble of words, no? Part of being Catholic is working together so we arrive at the same, correct interpetation, all of us together. Not this in one church and that in the church down the road. Both can't be right. I think a lot of trouble comes from this sola scriptura notion. That runs you up against John 21:25 "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." So things external to the Bible, like tradition must be considered.
Now the Catholic view is that the Bible must be internally consistent, it can't mean one thing here and the opposite there. The Bible must be interpreted in a manner to be consistent. Further, since everything Jesus taught and did are not in the Bible, interpretation must also be consistent with other validated sources such as tradition.
That does not mean some other source can overrule the Bible. It's that if a passage can be read to mean this, that, or the other, which one conforms to the rest of the Bible and validated external sources.
As I understand it (and I haven't dwelt on it) this does not violate the original meaning of sola scriptura. Extrinsic evidence does not change the scripture but enhance our understanding of what scripture is really trying to say.
I think a lot of trouble comes from this sola scriptura notion. That runs you up against John 21:25 "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." So things external to the Bible, like tradition must be considered.
I don’t understand how that passage relates to Sola Scriptura. Could you elaborate?
Historic Protestants hold to the internal consistency of scripture as well.
There is an understanding we in my circles call biblicism wherein Sola Scriptura is practiced as “me and my Bible” which is not the historic meaning of the doctrine but you can see where it gets you from guys like curdog & others here. It’s post modern a priori assumptions being forced onto whatever pieces of the Bible the reader has deemed authoritative. Completely and utterly subjective and unaccountable to anyone or anything which, when applied to God’s revelation about Himself, can tend to be pretty idolatrous.
Anyway thanks for the continuing conversation here I appreciate hearing the way you see this stuff.
It is my understanding that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that scripture is authoritative & true.
If the RCC teaches that scripture is authoritative and true, then why didn't they follow it? The Bible says that if a brother has fallen away, bring him back with prayer and understanding. The RCC tore his arms off on the rack. The Bible says that the Jews are STILL God's chosen people, in spite of their disbelief. God will deal with them. The RCC burned them at the stake. The Bible says to search the scriptures for truth. For centuries, the RCC killed any one found with a Bible. One of the first Bible translators, William Tyndale, was strangled and burned at the stake for trying to bring the Bible to the people. I could go on.
Like the killing of Baptist missionarys in South America near a hundred years ago?
The last killing in South America was about 50 years ago. A young missionary was killed by natives on an island off the coast of India just last year.
Sure, it's what the concept has been taken to mean. Look at this thread, a good part of the posts effectively say if it's not in the Bible it don't mean squat. I think John is advising us to be open to teachings not in the Bible. Use all the resources open to you. Of course with all caution, cannot be discordant with the Bible. Compound that with the Bible means what I think it should mean and any other thoughts on the subject are just send-you-to-hell wrong and you get a confusing mess.
Seems to me we see things much the same way.
I like this, makes me think. Sometimes about stuff I hadn't thought about for 40 years.
Also keep in mind that the Church of England wasn't founded for Christian reasons. Henry IIIV was essentially at war with the pope. He wanted an annulment from his wife and the pope wouldn't give him one. So, Henry started his own church for the purpose of violating God's laws. The church was created in sin from the very start.
So was the Roman Catholic Church as it was preempted by Constantine in the 300's. Roman holy days were used for many of the Christian holy days we celebrate today.
Sure, it's what the concept has been taken to mean. Look at this thread, a good part of the posts effectively say if it's not in the Bible it don't mean squat. I think John is advising us to be open to teachings not in the Bible. Use all the resources open to you. Of course with all caution, cannot be discordant with the Bible. Compound that with the Bible means what I think it should mean and any other thoughts on the subject are just send-you-to-hell wrong and you get a confusing mess.
Seems to me we see things much the same way.
I like this, makes me think. Sometimes about stuff I hadn't thought about for 40 years.
I believe that God created the Bible with easily enough information to know Him and His ways, what He expects from us and who we are to be, and to be saved. But I also believe He also put content in that would cause some to become fixated on that which was not important but dangerous and easily twisted. He expects us not only to be discerning as we gain knowledge, but also seek out things He had hidden to both His glory and ours.
So was the Roman Catholic Church as it was preempted by Constantine in the 300's. Roman holy days were used for many of the Christian holy days we celebrate today.
And celebrating a holy day on day "n" has what to do with salvation? For as much as some protestants complain about legalism, complaining about the date of a celebration is about as legalistic as you can get. Perhaps we shouldn't be cooking on Sundays either.
Ultimately anyone so bold as to assert any really conclusions on the ultimate questions will fall back on a circular argument of one sort or another. They’re all “philosophical car crashes” so-to-speak, accept the ones that are easy & safe.
As a child I was given this question: If you have to accept Jesus to be saved, what about the native in deepest, darkest Africa who is barely aware that there's an outside world much less Jesus. An otherwise good guy, does he go to hell? Is that the act of a mercirciful, loving and just god?
This sidesteps the most important question tho; why does God save ANYONE if He is just? We all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.
Man is by his nature fallen and sinful.
The fact that God would come in human form and sacrifice Himself for ANYONE is amazing.
As He said to Moses, He will have mercy upon whom He will have mercy.
He did it because He made us in His image and loved us, as I know you are aware.
Simple logic demands that if there truly is only One God, any prayer made to any Deity will be heard by the Only Deity, regardless of the name applied by the one praying. That Deity, Jesus, will judge the sincerity of the request.
'
Pretty close to Catholic doctrine actually, stated differently,
So a Muslim praying to Allah is close to Catholic doctrine? Jesus is mentioned in the Koran but not as God. He's just a mere man. Praying to Allah will be heard by that 'mere man' and he won't be pleased.
Also keep in mind that the Church of England wasn't founded for Christian reasons. Henry IIIV was essentially at war with the pope. He wanted an annulment from his wife and the pope wouldn't give him one. So, Henry started his own church for the purpose of violating God's laws. The church was created in sin from the very start.
Cramer was the righteous reformer who forged the 39 articles. He was burned alive with Lattimer and Ridley... Their martyr blood made England Protestant for 300 years.
Also keep in mind that the Church of England wasn't founded for Christian reasons. Henry IIIV was essentially at war with the pope. He wanted an annulment from his wife and the pope wouldn't give him one. So, Henry started his own church for the purpose of violating God's laws. The church was created in sin from the very start.
No disagreement there at all.
The English Reformation goes way back BEFFORE Henry the 8th... Wyclif. And Henry was No Protestant... he had a war of words with Luther himself. To distill the English Reformation down to the divorce king does violence to the real truth. Straw man.
When was this herasey rewritten into the catechism telling us moslems can go to heaven without believing in Christ?
Oh yes, pope John Paul in the 1992. 841. The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."
Just more of Satan leading Gods children astray. m
As a child I was given this question: If you have to accept Jesus to be saved, what about the native in deepest, darkest Africa who is barely aware that there's an outside world much less Jesus. An otherwise good guy, does he go to hell? Is that the act of a mercirciful, loving and just god?
Jesus has always been the Agent of salvation, before and after His incarnation. Nowhere does scripture claim that the recipient of salvation must be aware that Jesus of Nazareth is that Agent.
Simple logic demands that if there truly is only One God, any prayer made to any Deity will be heard by the Only Deity, regardless of the name applied by the one praying. That Deity, Jesus, will judge the sincerity of the request.
It’s only the Power Hungry Priests and some Elitist Protestants who insist on adding sacraments such as baptism or being in Communion with a church to the simple Gospel message. The very idea that Jesus would place the fate of His movement to a fallible human, St Peter, and establish an unbroken line of subsequent Peters is the greatest farce in Christendom.
It’s only the modern egoist who uses the Bible to support whatever his latest intellectual masturbation produces.
This^^^, but those who were not appraised of Christ and the good news didnt have to pray to anyone for forgiveness or salvation. They just had to live within the parameters of their God given conscience for Christs intervention i would expect, though there are things of His business that will always be above our pay grade.
When was this herasey rewritten into the catechism telling us moslems can go to heaven without believing in Christ?
Oh yes, pope John Paul in the 1992. 841. The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."
Just more of Satan leading Gods children astray.
As a child I was given this question: If you have to accept Jesus to be saved, what about the native in deepest, darkest Africa who is barely aware that there's an outside world much less Jesus. An otherwise good guy, does he go to hell? Is that the act of a mercirciful, loving and just god?
Youve missed the entire premise of the ways to get to Heaven.
1. He did not say humans have to accept Jesus to be saved (man extrapolated and added that. No scripture says that).
2. He said to get to the Father its going to go through Jesus Christ.
3 He said you WILL be saved if you accept Christ. Thats a sure way, not the only way.
You get there through Jesus Christ if :
A)You know the good news, believe and repent
B) Are a child and die and are predestined.
C). Are one born ages ago who never heard the word and Christ decides you should go because you were predestined.
Man is who said you have to accept Jesus Christ to be saved. Thats a lie on the surface because kids go to heaven wighout having known Jesus.
We who have heard the good new after Jesus came have to accept the good news and seek repentence.
Oh I dunno, suppose it's that love and mercy thing. He made us in His image and likeness, we are his children AS LONG AS WE ACCEPT HIM AS SAVIOR AND DONT TURN FROM HIS WORD AND FOLLOW SOME PUFFED UP HUMAN POSING AS HIM. I don't find us as despicable as that, more that we come into being knowing nothing and with much to learn. He made us knowing our nature, He does only good stuff, so we can't be all that bad.
FIXT
THATS WHY HE SAID DO NOT BE DECIEVED BY FALSE PROPHETS OR THOSE COMING IN HIS NAME OF FATHER.
He said none of us are good. He ssid we all deserve eternal fire, or words to that effect.
Christ is Lord. He can get people to the Father who died worshipping cats and building pyramids, Able or Noah or his kids, before Jesus Christ was ever born.
You think Able or Noah or Abraham went to hell for not calling on the name of Jesus?
[quote=nighthawk]Sure, it's what the concept has been taken to mean. Look at this thread, a good part of the posts effectively say if it's not in the Bible it don't mean squat. I think John is advising us to be open to teachings not in the Bible.
Above quote from NK.
I dont think John is telling us to be open to the teachings of mortal men who presume to have a special inside track to Him and add to what He said or contradict what He said in the Bible.
You are saying He told us one thing in the Bible and whispers something else in the popes ear. IOW, your telling us God lied to us in the Bible.
God said He was the same yesterday today and tomorrow. Youre calling Him a liar and saying He isnt the same all the time.
He said dont add to or subtract from the Bible or youre in danger. Youre calling Him a liar and saying its ok.
He said call no one else on earth father and you and Satan are calling Him a liar and saying its ok.
He also said you would try to justify your sin and He didnt lie. You tried to justify your sin.
When you tell your little kid not to cross the street and they did and they tell you a sucker in a white robe came along and told them the sucker said he knew you and you didnt mean it and its ok and the kid did what would you say?
No matter how many times and ways I say nobody in the Church worships the pope and to do so would get you excommunicated instantly you insist otherwise. I give up.
The post immediately above this one is rhetorical blather.
No matter how many times and ways I say nobody in the Church worships the pope and to do so would get you excommunicated instantly you insist otherwise. I give up.
The post immediately above this one is rhetorical blather.
The RC church thinks it’s the only True church. Salvation is individual and not dependent on church membership. (It’s why the church does not recognize evangelical Christianity.).
The pope has added his own twist of Biblical legalism by espousing that salvation depends on faith AND good works. Pope should not be considered God’s highest earthly authority.
I do not believe that when you commit a sin that a man can tell you to say three Hail Mary's, and you will be forgiven of that sin. There is only one way you are forgiven of your sins, and it ain't through a Pope or a priest.
Another misconception. God forgives sins. He does that through the priest.
The blood of Jesus cleanses us from ALL sin. 1 John 1:7 (Doesn’t say a priest is needed for this!!)
We don’t have to confess doodly squat to a priest or beg to be restored to perfection. God is quite capable of forgiving us without the help of a priest.
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9 (doesn’t say to confess our sins to a priest)
Our sins were cleansed at the cross by Jesus.
By one sacrifice he has made perfect (sinless) forever those who are being made holy. Hebrews 10:18
(This is also what Martin Luther was truing to say.)
No matter how many times and ways I say nobody in the Church worships the pope and to do so would get you excommunicated instantly you insist otherwise. I give up.
The post immediately above this one is rhetorical blather.
I've heard that about Mary, too. However, I was in an RC church and saw a stature of Mary with a bunch of children at her feet, heads bowed, praying to her. The RCC calls her a co-redeemer with Christ. That's pure invention as the Bible says nothing of the kind. She was honored by being the mother of Jesus, but beyond that, she was nothing more than any other believer, saved by Jesus' blood.
I do not believe that when you commit a sin that a man can tell you to say three Hail Mary's, and you will be forgiven of that sin. There is only one way you are forgiven of your sins, and it ain't through a Pope or a priest.
Another misconception. God forgives sins. He does that through the priest.
The blood of Jesus cleanses us from ALL sin. 1 John 1:7 (Doesn’t say a priest is needed for this!!)
We don’t have to confess doodly squat to a priest or beg to be restored to perfection. God is quite capable of forgiving us without the help of a priest.
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9 (doesn’t say to confess our sins to a priest)
Our sins were cleansed at the cross by Jesus.
By one sacrifice he has made perfect (sinless) forever those who are being made holy. Hebrews 10:18
(This is also what Martin Luther was truing to say.)
This^^^, but according to that scripture, no renumeration to sinful men is involved, so not all men will agree with thee or He.
Christ is Lord. He can get people to the Father who died worshipping cats and building pyramids Able or Noah or his kids before Jesus Christ was ever born.
You think Able or Noah or Abraham went to hell for not calling on the name of Jesus?
PS. This was not directed at you, Ricky, but to what i consider common modern misconceptions.
No matter how many times and ways I say nobody in the Church worships the pope and to do so would get you excommunicated instantly you insist otherwise. I give up.
The post immediately above this one is rhetorical blather.
I watched as pope Benedict on tv called on the believers of Christ to worship the Church.
The church is the people who are believers and we are to worship Him, not a church.
In all honesty..........I was raised Catholic, though I’m pretty much in the camp of disliking all organized religion now, and you have literally invested more time and thought on the Pope than I did the first 18 years of my life. The Catholics I grew up around (northern NH folk) didn’t really seem too worried about him one way or the other. It was a mill town, though.........,,
Systematized biblical truth right here on the sufficiency of Scripture:
The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word: and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed. " - Westminster Confession of Faith 1.6
Christ is Lord. He can get people to the Father who died worshipping cats and building pyramids Able or Noah or his kids before Jesus Christ was ever born.
You think Able or Noah or Abraham went to hell for not calling on the name of Jesus?
PS. This was not directed at you, Ricky, but to what i consider common modern misconceptions.
For the record, both Abraham and Moses met Jesus face to face. He wasn't yet called Jesus, though. He was called The Angel of the Lord. Abraham met him at the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Moses met him in the burning bush. The Bible doesn't specifically say that Abel met Jesus but his brother Cain did. Jesus was/is the visible one in the trinity. When someone in the OT talks to God face to face, that's Jesus.
All of the OT people needed saving, just like us. They were still saved by Jesus' blood even though it didn't happen for another few centuries. Their faith was considered righteousness and saved them by what Jesus would do later.
Christ is Lord. He can get people to the Father who died worshipping cats and building pyramids Able or Noah or his kids before Jesus Christ was ever born.
You think Able or Noah or Abraham went to hell for not calling on the name of Jesus?
I’d suggest you read very carefully throughout Hebrews 11. The whole book is about how much better Jesus is than the Old Testament forms and shadows by definition because they were meant to point the people of faith ahead to Christ.
Note that the promise that they looked toward was not received; that promise was Christ and they understood that God was bringing about definitive redemption from sin & death. Moses “considered Christ”. They weren’t worshipping anything but the God of Christ. There are no examples of people promised salvation in the Bible who didn’t look in faith to Christ.
I don’t know who is saved and who isn’t and that’s fine by me; but Scripture is crystal clear that all who are saved in the Bible were saved not by abstract faith but by faith in God’s covenant promise of redemption in Christ. It is the object of faith, not its mere presence as an abstraction that the Bible says confers salvation.
Heb 11 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2 For by it the people of old received their commendation. 3 By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.
4 By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks. 5 By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God. 6 And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. 7 By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.
8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. 10 For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. 11 By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised. 12 Therefore from one man, and him as good as dead, were born descendants as many as the stars of heaven and as many as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore.
13 These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. 14 For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. 15 If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, 18 of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 19 He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back. 20 By faith Isaac invoked future blessings on Jacob and Esau. 21 By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff. 22 By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his bones.
23 By faith Moses, when he was born, was hidden for three months by his parents, because they saw that the child was beautiful, and they were not afraid of the king's edict. 24 By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, 25 choosing rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. 26 He considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking to the reward. 27 By faith he left Egypt, not being afraid of the anger of the king, for he endured as seeing him who is invisible. 28 By faith he kept the Passover and sprinkled the blood, so that the Destroyer of the firstborn might not touch them.
29 By faith the people crossed the Red Sea as on dry land, but the Egyptians, when they attempted to do the same, were drowned. 30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they had been encircled for seven days. 31 By faith Rahab the prostitute did not perish with those who were disobedient, because she had given a friendly welcome to the spies.
32 And what more shall I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets— 33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 34 quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, were made strong out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. 35 Women received back their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, so that they might rise again to a better life. 36 Others suffered mocking and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. 37 They were stoned, they were sawn in two,[a] they were killed with the sword. They went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, afflicted, mistreated— 38 of whom the world was not worthy—wandering about in deserts and mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.
39 And all these, though commended through their faith, did not receive what was promised, 40 since God had provided something better for us, that apart from us they should not be made perfect. -ESV
I've heard that about Mary, too. However, I was in an RC church and saw a stature of Mary with a bunch of children at her feet, heads bowed, praying to her. The RCC calls her a co-redeemer with Christ. That's pure invention as the Bible says nothing of the kind. She was honored by being the mother of Jesus, but beyond that, she was nothing more than any other believer, saved by Jesus' blood.
Catholics may pray to Mary or any of the saints. Prayers asking them to pray to God for us. There is biblical justification for that. Only God is worshiped. Only Jesus is named as our redeemer.
If Mary is given to us as our spiritual mother (John 19:25-29) why wouldn't you ask for her help?
And if you truly follow Jesus why wouldn't you do good works as He commanded?
I've heard that about Mary, too. However, I was in an RC church and saw a stature of Mary with a bunch of children at her feet, heads bowed, praying to her. The RCC calls her a co-redeemer with Christ. That's pure invention as the Bible says nothing of the kind. She was honored by being the mother of Jesus, but beyond that, she was nothing more than any other believer, saved by Jesus' blood.
Catholics may pray to Mary or any of the saints. Prayers asking them to pray to God for us. There is biblical justification for that. Only God is worshiped. Only Jesus is named as our redeemer.
If Mary is given to us as our spiritual mother (John 19:25-29) why wouldn't you ask for her help?
And if you truly follow Jesus why wouldn't you do good works as He commanded?
Spiritual mother? Jesus merely told John to take his mother, apparently widowed, into his house to care for her after he died. He was doing his duty as a good son. There are questions as to why Jesus didn't place her with one of his younger brothers but possibly it was because none of them were believers at the time.
Besides, talking to the dead is evil: Deut 18:11 ... or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. 12 Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD, and because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you.
God didn't give any church the authority to turn this evil practice into a good one. There is no provision in the Bible for praying to any dead person. We pray to God and God alone.
![[Linked Image]](https://religionnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/hz-AP19101605654930-990x660.jpg)
You know, the guys who read scripture in Greek and Aramaic. You can miss a lot of nuance and context translating to English. How many different versions of the bible are out there now?
