Fascinating inter-Protestant discussion-

[inflyt]

Genesis315:

Hmmm, I had no idea Iraq was was martyring millions is Europe…

By the way, when listing an anti-Catholic “fact,” please cite the Lorraine Boettner book, JM Carroll lecture, or Chick tract you got it from.

I don’t know Lorraine Boettner or JM Carroll. I have seen a Chick track before but don’t recall what it was about. What anti-organized religion fact do you refer to?

 

[Wormwood]

You would not, however, find this in the Catholic Church. It has been consistant in its doctrinal interpretations since its founding in c 30 A.D.

GEEZ GHOSTY!!! you are all over the place on this forum…I think you’re stalking me . Well first of all your dates are debatable, but that really just means you guys split your hairs first, distinguishing yourselves from the jews.

Futhermore, the corruption you cite was not actually at the core of Catholicism. The bishops who were “selling indulgences” in the manner Luther complained about were punished, some removed from their bishopric, long before Luther made his actual split.

This get’s into a whole grey area about if they hadn’t been publically “caught” would they have been punished? Sort of like the more recent priestly abuses…who knew what and when, is kind of hard to say. At any rate there is hardly anyway for us to know what was actually happening, all we have are statements that reflect the best interest of the church, given that most people that could write were in the church, this is not surprising.

The “elected by fallible men” really means nothing, because the office of the Papacy was not established by infallible men, but by the Son of God.

What verse?

Pointing out the errors people hold concerning their idea of God is also loving. A loving person wants all men to come to know all Truth. We need to discus the things we don’t agree on because that is the only way to teach the Truth to those in error. If a teacher knows one of her students thinks 2+2=3, she doesn’t brush that under the table and focus on the fact that at least the kid knows the alphabet

First of all, in our school systems, if they know the whole alphabet they are ready for college. And you are equating apples and oranges. 2+2=3 can be corrected because 2+2 can always be demonstrated to equal 4. It is an example with repeatable results. There is no equivalent for your theories on God. (A+B(2)= eucharist? ) No. So to “correct” someone, you must KNOW the answer…and believe me I have heard the whole faith=knowing speech you have welling up inside so don’t bother…but you still don’t KNOW …you speculate, you theorize, you believe, but you do not KNOW. If you knew, there would be no faith involved.

 

[inflyt]

Considering that much of prophecy is only fully understood after it occurs, there will naturally be differing opinions as to what a reading may indicate. The more fundamental aspects of the faith, laid down by the bible, are consistent among true believers. “Babylon” describes the source of errors found in organized religion. The Mysteries of Babylon represent the false religious system of antiquity (hence “mystery, Great Babylon”) codified by Nimrod and Semiramis, the “anti-type” to fundamental biblical truth. In a certain sense, the “doctrinal interpretations” of Babylon have been consistent since before 30 A.D. Among the most significant errors of Babylon (Catholicism and Protestantism) are the almost total control that “the priesthood” has over the doctrine and lifestyle of the people it pretends to represent. Protestantism is in some ways worse than Catholicism in this regard.

In true Christianity, every believer is apart of the “royal priesthood” which has been gratefully given to us by the blood of Christ. Every believer is responsible for possessing their own souls and not allowing anyone to bring them and their faith into bondage to another (Luke 21:19, 2 Peter 2:19 Tyndale). We are commanded to standfast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free according to the new birth of Christ within us (Galitians 5:1 Tyndale). That is not to say that we will not have times in our lives in which we will struggle to free ourselves from one deception or another for “we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.” (Acts 14:22 Tyndale) Those in whom the spirit of God moves concur with the true doctrine laid out in the majority text:

For all scripture given by inspiration of God, is profitable to teach, to improve, to amend and to instruct in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect and prepared unto all good works. (2 Timothy 3:16 Tyndale)

And ye have an ointment of the holy ghost…And ye need not that any man teach you: but as the annointing teacheth you all things, and is true, and is no lie ( 1 John 2:20,27 Tyndale)

When a fellow Christian rebukes another it is from a position of equality in the hope that the other will turn from error. No one has authority over another’s faith (2 Cor 1:24 Tyndale). Authority is based only in the spiritual use of God’s word, the witness of which is to be followed as an example and not used to stratify by an assumed position (Hebrews 13:7 Tyndale). Jesus condemned authority structures within Christianity.

Ye know that they which seem to bear rule among the gentiles, reign as lords over them. And they that be great among them, exercise authority over them. So shall it not be among you (Mark 10:42 Tyndale)

Jesus constantly rebuked the Jewish religious authorities who had gone the way of Babylon by replacing the authority of scripture with their own traditions and devices of priestcraft (Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Matthew 15:6 Tyndale).

 

[inflyt]

Tertullian, who represented the true afterglow of Peter, rejected the centralization of authority by those who claimed to represent the church. Those who falsely claimed authority merged Babylonian doctrine with Christianity. This is the true origin of many of the doctrines and canon of today’s spiritual Babylon:

The infallibility of the office of the pontifex maximus (the high Babylonian priest) and, in the more subtle case, the “rightness” of men of “religious office” (i.e. “priest” or “pastor”) over the “rightness” of the “common” people .

Transubstantiation (or Co-substantiation in the case of Protestantism) - a rather gruesome pagan tradition of eating the flesh and drinking the blood of human sacrifices. True christians see the spirit of Christ as sanctifying what is already Christ’s: i.e. he holds the universe together with his spirit including the bread and wine which when received by the sanctified believer becomes part of the spiritual body of Christ.

Confession of one believer to another believer seperated “in position” (i.e. a “priest” or “pastor”)from the rest - a device by the Babylonian priesthood employed to retain a psychological bondage of “initiate” to “priest.” True christians are commanded to freely confess their sins one to another (James 5:16 Tyndale).

The various “sinless” states of Mary - wholly blasphemous because God as father, word, and holy ghost is the only one without sin (1 John 1:8 Tydnale). Mary was blessed because she was in the position to so intimately learn from the Word of God. (Luke 11:27,28 Tyndale) Isreal had long been rebuked by God for falling into idolatry involving the “Queen of Heaven.” (Jeremiah 7:18,44:17,18,19 KJV). The custom of exalting Mary has roots in the Babylonian tradition of exalting Semiramis beside Nimrod.

The tradition of celibacy among the “priesthood” - “The highest orders of the [Babylonian] priesthood were bound to a life of celibacy.” Scripture condemns it (1 Timothy 4 Tyndale). Some cultures which adopted the system of Babylon rejected “the yoke of celibacy,” and “the priesthood were permitted to marry.” In other words, the daughters of Babylon (Protestantism), like the ancient daughters of Babylon before them, happen as a matter of convenience to reject the sterner requirements of the Babylonian priesthood found in Catholicism.

Baptism -

Is Christ divied? was Paul crucified for you? either were ye babtised in the name of Paul? I thank God that I christened none of you, but Crispus and Gaius, lest any should say that I had baptised in mine own name. I bapstised also the house of Stephana. Furthermore know I not whether I baptised any man or no. For Christ sent me not to baptise, but to preach the gospel (1 Corinthians 1:13-17 Tyndale). Paul, who organized the early church, utterly rejects the superstitions and formalisms at work in the early church concerning babtism. True Christians baptise one another as an outward confession of a newly born inward state that has already occured, period. Outward confession is a part of our faith, period. Yet baptism and its superstitutions played a central role in inititation into the mysteries of Babylon.

There are many other rites and ceremonies of Catholicism and Protestantism which are steeped in the doctrines of the Babylonian mysteries. This is why the faithful after the departure of Paul, starting notably with Tertullian perhaps, have ever “come away from her.” (Revelation 18 Tyndale)

 

[Genesis315]

inflyt:

I don’t know Lorraine Boettner or JM Carroll. I have seen a Chick track before but don’t recall what it was about. What anti-organized religion fact do you refer to?

Boettner’s “Roman Catholicism,” Carroll’s lecture-turned pamphlet “Trail of Blood,” and any number of Chick tracts claim the Inquisitions killed millions of Bible Christians (I assume that’s what you mean by martyrs). So I was just wondering from where you acquired your data.

 

[inflyt]

Genesis315:

Boettner’s “Roman Catholicism,” Carroll’s lecture-turned pamphlet “Trail of Blood,” and any number of Chick tracts claim the Inquisitions killed millions of Bible Christians (I assume that’s what you mean by martyrs). So I was just wondering from where you acquired your data.

If I remember correctly, I first saw the documentation of Christian genocide by the hands of Rome in Halley’s Bible Handbook.

 

[inflyt]

I just looked quickly at the latest versioin of Halley’s Bible Handbook and it appears that the references to the numbers of Christians and the various countries where they were murdered has been removed. I’m pretty sure I first read about it in this book. There was reference after reference of the geocide in an earlier version of his book. I seem to faintly remember someone mention to me that those references were removed because of pressure from the “Billy Graham” crusades who used the handbook for new “initiates.”

 

[scylla]

Hello Inflyt,
I would really recomment reading Catholicism and Fundamentalism and maybe some of the Early Church Fathers for yourself.

It is really an eye opener to see the difference between the caricature of the Catholic Church and what it really is. It is difficult to respond to all the comments you had, but if you are truly seeking the truth there is plenty of documentation.

Or if you are really seeking the truth just, start a thread in a charitable way asking us to address any one of those points. We will be happy to give you a good comprehensive answer.

It is a common anti-catholic tactic of one who is not seeking an answer to just give out a whole bunch of “evidence” that the Catholic Church is wrong. It is common for people to just come and post a whole bunch of accusations like you did and not care for an answer. So don’t take this the wrong way if people don’t like that, but if you are truly seeking the truth just ask one at a time in a new thread and we will seek the truth together.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[inflyt]

I responded in this thread because it was an appropriate place to respond to criticism on the origins of the bible and its doctrines. I am not “anti-catholic” as you say, since I believe in the fellowship of the universal body of Christ. I am “anti-organized religion,” however, and if there were some who took offense of my defense of the bible and its doctrine, I can hope that some will, some day, open their eyes to the truth. I am confident of who I represent and do not need anyone to “explain the bible” to me. I will continue to respond to postings in this thread as long as I feel moved to respond (unless of course the administraters see fit to close the thread or remove me from the forum). I thank the forum for the opportunity to defend my position on the bible and its doctrines up to this point.

 

[Ghosty]

GEEZ GHOSTY!!! you are all over the place on this forum…I think you’re stalking me .

I wish I could say I’ve singled you out, but really you just happen to be saying interesting things in threads that are, in themselves, interesting to me

Well first of all your dates are debatable, but that really just means you guys split your hairs first, distinguishing yourselves from the jews.

Actually we don’t consider the Church to be split from the Jews until much later. We base the founding of the Church just after the death of Jesus, circa 30 A.D. The time period is actually marked in Scripture, with Pentecost being the absolute marker point. In fact, the Church today still doesn’t truly distinguish itself from the pre-Messianic Jews; it refers to itself as Israel. We just tend to use other language so as not to minimize the difference between the Messianic Israel and the pre-Messianic Israel. Bottom line, the Church does not, and never has, considered itself a seperate religion from Judaism; the seperation was on their side, not ours. You can see this all through the Book of Acts, as the Church began preaching in the synagogues, and did not leave of its own accord.

What verse?

Matthew 16:16-19

16 Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. 18 And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

This get’s into a whole grey area about if they hadn’t been publically “caught” would they have been punished? Sort of like the more recent priestly abuses…who knew what and when, is kind of hard to say. At any rate there is hardly anyway for us to know what was actually happening, all we have are statements that reflect the best interest of the church, given that most people that could write were in the church, this is not surprising.

My point is that what you don’t see is the Church changing the rules in order to dodge tough questions about such abuses. Sometimes they are covered up by people in the Church, absolutely, and they will have to answer to that in front of God if not on Earth. The thing is, you never see the Church come out and say “Nah, what they were doing is ok now. Nothing to see here, move along.” The fact that such things are covered up, even within the Church, actually goes a long way in demonstrating that the Church holds a very consistant line about such things, and these folks know that there’s not a chance in Hell that they’re gonna get off easy if the truth comes out. Compare this with Protestantism, which tends to have denominational splits whenever a disagreement arises, rather than cover-ups.

That’s actually something that’s always impressed about the Catholic Church: even in times when the Church arguably held absolute worldly power, it didn’t go changing rules on a whim, but rather the sinners who hid within the Church hid all the more for fear of discovery by the Church itself.

 

[Church_Militant]

inflyt:

Not really. God created the majority text based on the inspired writings of the Apostles that he wanted to include. The majority text doesn’t have to contain every inspired word ever written, just those God knows is necessary for completeness in the faith. I find the letters of Enoch (from which Jude quotes for example) personally interesting, but I would not want them included in the Bible.

You have just gotta be kiddin’ me! Check this out…

One thing that most folks don’t know is that out of the 373 OT quotes in the NT 340 (90%) come from the Septuagint Greek text, which tells us that that is the one that Jesus and the apostles quoted from. Since it patently contained the DCs, that tells us something by inferrence don’tcha think?

BTW this bit of scholarship actually comes from “Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey” (Moody Press, 1983) by Gleason Archer & G.C. Chirichigno, both of whom are Protestant.
Pax vobiscum,

 

[Church_Militant]

inflyt:

I responded in this thread because it was an appropriate place to respond to criticism on the origins of the bible and its doctrines. I am not “anti-catholic” as you say, since I believe in the fellowship of the universal body of Christ. I am “anti-organized religion,” however, and if there were some who took offense of my defense of the bible and its doctrine, I can hope that some will, some day, open their eyes to the truth. I am confident of who I represent and do not need anyone to “explain the bible” to me. I will continue to respond to postings in this thread as long as I feel moved to respond (unless of course the administraters see fit to close the thread or remove me from the forum). I thank the forum for the opportunity to defend my position on the bible and its doctrines up to this point.

You keep spouting that anti-Catholic terminology there Bub, (Like calling our most holy faith “Babylon”) and I can just about assure you that you won’t be posting here for long. That’s offensive in the same way it would be if we referred to you as a heretic, or your non-denom church as schismatic or apostate.

You have one each heavily skewed idea of history…

 

[Church_Militant]

inflyt:

… Those who falsely claimed authority merged Babylonian doctrine with Christianity. This is the true origin of many of the doctrines and canon of today’s spiritual Babylon:

The infallibility of the office of the pontifex maximus (the high Babylonian priest) …
Transubstantiation (or Co-substantiation in the case of Protestantism) - a rather gruesome pagan tradition of eating the flesh and drinking the blood of human sacrifices. …

Confession of one believer to another believer seperated “in position” (i.e. a “priest” or “pastor”)from the rest - a device by the Babylonian priesthood employed to retain a psychological bondage of “initiate” to “priest.” …

The various “sinless” states of Mary - wholly blasphemous …

The tradition of celibacy among the “priesthood” - "…

Baptism -… True Christians baptise one another as an outward confession of a newly born inward state that has already occured, period. Outward confession is a part of our faith, period. Yet baptism and its superstitutions played a central role in inititation into the mysteries of Babylon.

There are many other rites and ceremonies of Catholicism and Protestantism which are steeped in the doctrines of the Babylonian mysteries. …

Boy…this guy needs some really serious history lessons. He may not have seen much of Chick’s bunkum tracts, but his pastor or church leaders sure are using it as source materials for their teaching. And he tells us that he doesn’t trust the traditions of men! What hooey!

Note also the usual “shotgun” style attack on the Catholic faith where he lays out a whole long load of bunk that runs far off topic and at the same time manages to be just as insulting as possible short of telling us that we’re all goin’ to hell because we don’t believe like he does.

There’s really little point in answering him since if he really wanted answers to these things he’d’ve done a search and found all the thousands of threads that answer all this as well as the tracts on the ma(name removed by moderator)age Library.

Good grief…

 

[Wormwood]

wish I could say I’ve singled you out, but really you just happen to be saying interesting things in threads that are, in themselves, interesting to me

Well thanks.

Actually we don’t consider the Church to be split from the Jews until much later. We base the founding of the Church just after the death of Jesus, circa 30 A.D. The time period is actually marked in Scripture, with Pentecost being the absolute marker point. In fact, the Church today still doesn’t truly distinguish itself from the pre-Messianic Jews; it refers to itself as Israel.

Well first you say that you didn’t distingiush yourselves until much later, then you say it never really happened. Which is true? Plus, if there was no differentiation, wouldn’t Isreal be the head of the church and not Rome?

Matthew 16:16-19

16 Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. 18 And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

So this establishes Peter, and possibly his family line. I do not see the connection to Rome or the Catholic church as it is manifest today.

My point is that what you don’t see is the Church changing the rules in order to dodge tough questions about such abuses. Sometimes they are covered up by people in the Church, absolutely, and they will have to answer to that in front of God if not on Earth. The thing is, you never see the Church come out and say “Nah, what they were doing is ok now. Nothing to see here, move along.” The fact that such things are covered up, even within the Church, actually goes a long way in demonstrating that the Church holds a very consistant line about such things, and these folks know that there’s not a chance in Hell that they’re gonna get off easy if the truth comes out. Compare this with Protestantism, which tends to have denominational splits whenever a disagreement arises, rather than cover-ups.

Well what about celibacy? That was added over 1000 years after Christ, after the church began to lose a lot of land to inheritance. Seems like a convenient time to change what had been a suggestion of celibacy, into an enforced rule of celibacy. I await your inevitable reply

 

[inflyt]

Regarding Mathew 16:18,19: The big rock on which the chuch is built is the Word. Peter is a little rock within this big rock, as are all the saints which are referred to as “living stones.” Jesus singled out Peter because he is, in a certain sense, the “heart center” of the church - all the “little rocks” of saints are formed around the “center rock” which is Peter. The “keys of heaven” which implies spiritual authority is given to Peter as well as to all the saints per Matthew 18:18.

As for the question of where I get my spiritual authority (wasn’t that a question?), I receive it from God through the Holy Ghost and the word of God. As I have already said in so many words, I have no connection whatsoever with organized religion (except of course possibly through this forum). So if you now want to label me a heretic by your standards, you may do so. Everyone has a right to their own beliefs.

 

[Wormwood]

Regarding Mathew 16:18,19: The big rock on which the chuch is built is the Word. Peter is a little rock within this big rock, as are all the saints which are referred to as “living stones.” Jesus singled out Peter because he is, in a certain sense, the “heart center” of the church - all the “little rocks” of saints are formed around the “center rock” which is Peter. The “keys of heaven” which implies spiritual authority is given to Peter as well as to all the saints per Matthew 18:18

What you are quoting and what you are equating those quotes to, do not match up. Peter is a rock, there is no mention of saints. And I would like to point out no clear line of succession, but I think that is a banned topic. At any rate this does not point to catholicism in any way.

 

[inflyt]

Regarding the old versus new Isreal:

The Bible is very clear that the old religion in the old testament was “done away with” and replaced with the new religion described by the new testament. (2 Cor 3:7-11). The new religion is simply that we love Christ (in that he gave up his mortal life for our sakes) and we love our fellow man (Matt 22:37-40). Every believer in the new testament is a priest who follows these two commandments (1 Peter 2:9). Thus, the old Jewish religion with its myraid laws and ordinances died, spiritually and eternally, after the coming of Christ. The fig tree that Jesus cursed forever represents old Isreal (Mat 21:19, Luke 13:6-9).

The Jewish disciples enter into the synagogues to represent and preach the gospel. They observed Jewish customs to give as little offense as possible to their fellow countrymen and to integrate with their culture. It was a matter of convenience and love of culture to a cultural Jew. The gentile disciples gave no such heed to the old Jewish religion (Acts 15:5-11).