The antichristian Church

[Arial]

You guys all hate me, but if you would of looked closely at what I previously wrote, my forensic analysis of the Bible documentation proves that they edited the Bible to promote Peter. Y'all don't want to consider that because it messes with your Bible inerrant theology--even though the Catholics assembled the Bible! Weird. If you go into the Catholic Catechism book it will support all of the claims written here. I can prove specific numbers to focus on if anyone would like.

To begin a post by breaking the rules and accusing everyone here of hating you, is obnoxious. And what you have said before does not belong in this thread unless you are relating it specifically to the Catholic religion. We are Protestants and are not cut from the same cloth. I only question your assertion that they edited the Bible. They did not. They misinterpreted the passage in favor of themselves.

 

[Carbon]

The local churches (assemblies of disciples of the Lord) have always been united, not in a man-made organisation, like Catholicism, but in Christ, by the Holy Spirit.

Yes, of course.

Any "church" that you can join, by any means other than being born of God, then attending and participating in, is a man-made organisaton, not a biblical church, which does not mean that there are no genuine Christians in it, of course.

Ok

The churches had begun to become corrupt long before the 4th C. A.D., since most major heresies existed by the 2nd C. A.D..

I agree, for example, Gnosticism.

Neither Luther, nor anyone else, can turn RCism back to the Bible, since it is the Whore of Babylon and is destined for destruction.

I agree.

Come out of her, my people, that you be not partaker of her sins, nor receive of her plagues (from memory, so that might not be verbatim).

 

[Hazelelponi]

Why are there two sets of books in Revelation?

Because there's two groups of people.

People will be judged according to their works, according to God's moral law.

Everyone who is judged apart from Christ will die for their sin.

Everyone who is Christians deeds will be judged too, however for us we have a different ending, because our sin debt was paid, and we now belong to Christ (in the ressurection as well as in this life). We are told we get rewards for our deeds that are found to be acceptable before Him, but I think it's a bit hyperbolic since you can't really offer a greater amount of heaven or something, so not sure on the rewards point, but maybe there is such a thing as more of heaven. I would like my spot before the Throne continually.

 

[Hazelelponi]

"God intends for us to hope for and expect these rewards. Second Corinthians 5:10: “We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.” Or consider Matthew 10:42: “Whoever gives one of these little ones even a cup of cold water because he is a disciple, truly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward.” Or Ephesians 6:8: “Whatever good anyone does, this he will receive back from the Lord.”"

Your Holy Deeds Are Not Filthy Rags

In Christ, the righteous deeds you do by faith are emphatically not “filthy rags.” Pastor John corrects a common and profound misunderstanding.

www.desiringgod.org

 

[Carbon]

Revelation doesn't address Gnosticism.

Why are you talking about something different?

1 John 2:18-19 addresses the Church coup in the second generation of leaders and Revelation tells us that like a flood, the false teachers took over the Church. It rolls right into the beast-the Catholic Church. Even the Ram and the Goat of Daniel indicate the Catholic takeover of the Church. The statue of Daniel rolls from the Silver Kingdom right into the Bronze Kingdom--the pretenders. We know that the takeover occurred after Peter's death because Revelation tells us that too.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Where in Revelation which provides the full future of the New Covenant is Gnosticism addressed? It doesn't--John stated the generation after them are taking over the Church and that is the founders of the Catholic Church. You mentioned Gnosticism as a corruption of the Church, but that isn't supported by prophecy.

I'm sure I have mentioned before the Bible tells one singular story beginning to end.

It might look like multiple stories but in reality it's not, the Scripture is a unified whole as it stands. As such, there is no part we can dispense of, whether we understand it all or not.

All people who have faith in Christ, confess He is Lord, and are born again of water and Spirit know this fact, whether they understand it all or not.

Because for us these are ancient languages texts, we will have some small disputes over what this verse means or that, but we all understand the whole Book is the inerrent word of God. There is no other to turn to in matters of faith, doctrine and practice. Whenever there's any dispute we have Scripture to turn.

For us this is Life itself, in written format.

 

[Eleanor]

You guys all hate me, but if you would of looked closely at what I previously wrote,

Where can I find that?

my forensic analysis of the Bible documentation proves that they edited the Bible to promote Peter. Y'all don't want to consider that because it messes with your Bible inerrant theology--even though the Catholics assembled the Bible! Weird. If you go into the Catholic Catechism book it will support all of the claims written here. I can prove specific numbers to focus on if anyone would like.

There is even a key language error made by the false teachers when they edited Matthew 16:17-19 that reveals their fraud.

I'm gonna post a summary of the differences between me and those on your site and pretty much everyone in the Church. I'd appreciate it if you allow comments on it so that I can see if I'm missing anything. You don't like what I write and don't bother to investigate it for it's accuracy, but regardless I always want to capture everything correctly and only print the truth.

 

[Carbon]

You guys all hate me,

And why do you say such a thing?

 

[Eleanor]

Nope. Like most every Christians I've dealt with theology is so precious that messing with it seems to burn wires in people's brains. Let's stick to the data that I presented and get off the sidetracks.

Are you Catholic. . .yes or no?

 

[Musician]

The Catholic church definitely thinks too highly of themselves. How can the standard follower swallow all that crap they're shoveling?

 

[Carbon]

Being called a demon, for starters and also a lot of posts of scripture indicating that I'm Satan.

Really? Where? I have seen nothing of the kind, friend.

 

[Carbon]

The RCC teaches some unique things about Mary. According to its official dogma, Mary is the only person apart from Christ who was born free of original sin and, as a consequence, was able to live a sinless life. They also teach that, even though she was married to Joseph, she lived a life of perpetual virginity, bearing no children other than the Lord Jesus.
When her time on earth was complete, she was assumed into heaven by God and, according to the RCC, she has been crowned Queen of heaven and given the title and office of mediatrix. It is believed that she cooperates with the Lord Jesus in mediating salvation to sinners. Also, Mary is to receive prayer and devotion.

 

[Carbon]

Many believe the pope is the Antichrist. And after seeing some of their teachings, I can see why. For example,

Pius XI
Mary, by giving us Christ the Redeemer, and by rearing him, and by offering him at the foot of the cross as Victim for our sins, by such intimate association with Christ, and by her own most singular grace, became and is affectionately known as Reparatrix.

Leo XIII
When Mary offered herself completely to God together with her son in the temple, she was already sharing with him the painful atonement on behalf of the human race . . .(at the foot of the cross) she was a co-worker with Christ in his expiation for mankind and she offered up her son to the divine justice dying with him in her heart.


Continued......

 

[Carbon]

Many believe the pope is the Antichrist. And after seeing some of their teachings, I can see why. For example,

Pius XI
Mary, by giving us Christ the Redeemer, and by rearing him, and by offering him at the foot of the cross as Victim for our sins, by such intimate association with Christ, and by her own most singular grace, became and is affectionately known as Reparatrix.

Leo XIII
When Mary offered herself completely to God together with her son in the temple, she was already sharing with him the painful atonement on behalf of the human race . . .(at the foot of the cross) she was a co-worker with Christ in his expiation for mankind and she offered up her son to the divine justice dying with him in her heart.


Continued......

Benedict XV
Thus, she (Mary) suffered and all but died along with her son, suffering and dying - thus for the salvation of men she abdicated the rights of a mother toward her son, and insofar as it was hers to do, she immolated the son to placate God's justice, so that she herself may justly be said to have redeemed together with Christ the huiman race.

Pius IX
With her son, the only-begotten, she is the most powerful Mediatrix and Conciliatrix of the world,

According to papal authority, Mary cooperates with Christ in redemption by personal merit, satisfaction, sacrifice, and in offering a personal ransom price, and she is now the one authorized to dispense the grace of salvation to men.

The antichristian church.

 

[Carbon]

The RCC was influenced by paganism and many non-Christian doctrines.

A few examples.

The early church knew nothing of Confession and Penance. The Council of Trent taught that Christ instituted the priesthood for two primary functions. To forgive sins and to administer the sacrament of the Eucharist.

The RCC teaches that sin requires that satisfaction be made to God, and this is achieved through penance and good works; through the enduring of suffering in Purgatory, and through indulgencies which are authorized by the pope. Penitent works are meritorious before God who accepts such works as a payment for the temporal punishment due to sin. Private confession to a priest, which is known as auricular confession, was not known by the early church.

So, the early church knew nothing of the doctrine of auricular confession, penance, purgatory, or indulgencies.
Confession in the early church was a public matter that related to grave sin and could be done only once. There was no judicial absolution by a priest.

History shows that at the end of the second century and the beginning of the third century, pennances were introduced as a means of gaining foregiveness of sins and the distinction between mortal and venial sins became prominent.

The seeds of purgatory came into Christianity through paganizing and philosophical influiences introduced by Origin and it was later given dogmatic authorty by Gregory the Great.

Private confession to a priest did not come into prominence until the seventh or eigth centuries and it completely displaced public concfession.

The first recorded use of indulgiencies dated from the ninth centuy.

 

[David Lamb]

lol. You're trolling me. One outright called me a demon and some others have posted scripture verses referencing false teachers and demons.

I've been upfront and haven't made anything up. I point out what is written and what it indicates but it doesn't matter to you and everyone else here--you put your heads in the sand and go on the attack. For example, I've pointed out the following:

1. In Paul's own words he rejected the disciples and to back it up he indicated that the disciples rejected him too.

Could you give biblical references for saying that Paul rejected the disciples, and that they rejected him?

2. Paul was inconsistent in his description of Jesus appearance-a sign of being less than truthful. In his letters Paul claimed that Jesus appeared to him, but in his eyewitness testimony indicates Jesus never appeared to him. For one there is no description of Jesus given and Paul wouldn't recognize Jesus if he did appear--he never met Jesus.

Well, the account in Acts 9 says that Paul and Jesus had a conversation:

“As he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly a light shone around him from heaven. Then he fell to the ground, and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?" And he said, "Who are You, Lord?" Then the Lord said, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. It [is] hard for you to kick against the goads." So he, trembling and astonished, said, "Lord, what do You want me to do?" Then the Lord [said] to him, "Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do." And the men who journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice but seeing no one.” (Ac 9:3-7 NKJV)

3. Matthew's author copied key sections from Mark then they were edited to promote Peter as the leader of the Church. I'm still waiting for someone to do the analysis I've recommended.

On what basis do you assert that they were edited to promote Peter as the leader of the church? The bible does not teach anywhere that any of the apostles was the leader of the whole church. It teaches that Jesus Christ is the Head of His church.

4. The Gospel of Matthew's author's name is revealed by separating out the independently provided testimony from the copied testimony. That analysis provides a profile of the person and there is only one match for it in the Gospels--a man John described as a one of the twelve disciples--Nicodemus.

Not so. Matthew was a tax collector:

“As Jesus passed on from there, He saw a man named Matthew sitting at the tax office. And He said to him, "Follow Me." So he arose and followed Him.” (Mt 9:9 NKJV)

Nicodemus was not a tax collector. He was a Pharisee. Pharisees did not take on a job like tax collecting for the Romans.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Being called a demon, for starters and also a lot of posts of scripture indicating that I'm Satan

Technically I said stop following Satan and stop lying.

(Neither are accusations of demon possession,)

Plus, I got in trouble for saying that.. and I have been good ever since. So there's that.

The only thing I can tell you is that I'm sorry I am unable to apologize for saying it and hurting your feelings, but I believe sincerely you needed to see what you're saying, I wanted to wake you up and help you see.

That's all.. I know you think I'm just mean, but I'm not.

Though I might be the type who does reality checks. My son likes to remind me that I told him at 13 that disappointment is a big part of life and to just get used to it. He tells me I ruined his childhood through it . Lol ..

 

[Hazelelponi]

The RCC teaches some unique things about Mary. According to its official dogma, Mary is the only person apart from Christ who was born free of original sin and, as a consequence, was able to live a sinless life. They also teach that, even though she was married to Joseph, she lived a life of perpetual virginity, bearing no children other than the Lord Jesus.
When her time on earth was complete, she was assumed into heaven by God and, according to the RCC, she has been crowned Queen of heaven and given the title and office of mediatrix. It is believed that she cooperates with the Lord Jesus in mediating salvation to sinners. Also, Mary is to receive prayer and devotion.

I'm not sure what is forum appropriate but that's just horrible, horrible and more horrible.

None of that can be supported by the Word. Just horrible to go around teaching this.

 

[Hazelelponi]

...

 

[Hazelelponi]

.

Also, somewhere I have some writings of Irenaeus, who was a disciple of Polycarp, who himself was a disciple of the apostle John, who figured the antichrist would come from Italy and from the Latin Church. I can try to find it if anyone is interested. But not really a big deal.

How much of Irenaeus do we accept? Didn't he have a few odd ideas of his own? (I don't know)

I looked for the writings on my own so as not to bother you in asking for your time but I didn't find what you seem to refer to so I would ask if you could find the writings I wouldn't mind reading it.

You are putting forward an interesting case so far.

I've not read against heresies and I don't have the book.