Catholic Heresy (for the record)

Jeff_56 · Feb 2, 2015

as requested, as has been all along - the evil is in the source and the requirements totally against the good news, totally against scripture, totally against truth, and first of course totally without and totally against jesus.

The Roman catholic mass is both a blasphemy and an abomination

for the request, which has been all along > "Judge RDD (poetic license, partly in order not to puke) on what catechised congregation are obliged to do."

from the testimony of someone once totally deceived by the rdd >>
www .....(one dot) ......puritanboard.com/f34/roman-catholic-mass-both-blasphemy-abomination-75293/
"Exclamation: The Roman catholic mass (REQUIRED FOR the deceived members) is both a blasphemy and an abomination

quote a now saved, former catholic >>
"The Roman catholic mass is both a blasphemy and an abomination. I believe once one is born again, the Holy Spirit will show a person what the Catholic church really is about, and that the Mass is total blasphemy against Jesus. When I was born again, I wanted to throw up, when I realized what the Mass was truly about, and that it had a false "Christian" veneer to basically what is a "mass" ritual set up to dishonor God. Think about why "jesus" is presented "dead" on Catholic crucifixes all over the world, with his head slouched over. There is a reason for that.
When someone comes to know the real Jesus Christ, there is no excusing or loving the false Mass and it's communion wafer idol. Most in the pews think they are following "god" and do not realize what is happening. I did not either, as a Catholic, I had been trained from childhood on, to see the Mass as "holy" and as "god's will" and to believe the Eucharist wafer was really "jesus's" body and blood and that only a fully and properly ordained Catholic priest had the power to turn the wafer into 'god"."

also,
the complete story, or more of it, gruesome as it is, exposing the black abomination from hell(rdd), is
available from charles chiniquoy '50 years (YES 50 YEARS) in the church (SO-CALLED) of rome'...

and keith greens 'the catholic chronicles'

and thousands of other now saved, former catholics worldwide,

as well as several now saved, once not saved catholics, who have posted here.

ThomistColin · Feb 2, 2015

Jeff_56 said:

as requested, as has been all along - the evil is in the source and the requirements totally against the good news, totally against scripture, totally against truth, and first of course totally without and totally against jesus.

The Roman catholic mass is both a blasphemy and an abomination

for the request, which has been all along > "Judge RDD (poetic license, partly in order not to puke) on what catechised congregation are obliged to do."

from the testimony of someone once totally deceived by the rdd >>
www .....(one dot) ......puritanboard.com/f34/roman-catholic-mass-both-blasphemy-abomination-75293/
"Exclamation: The Roman catholic mass (REQUIRED FOR the deceived members) is both a blasphemy and an abomination

quote a now saved, former catholic >>
"The Roman catholic mass is both a blasphemy and an abomination. I believe once one is born again, the Holy Spirit will show a person what the Catholic church really is about, and that the Mass is total blasphemy against Jesus. When I was born again, I wanted to throw up, when I realized what the Mass was truly about, and that it had a false "Christian" veneer to basically what is a "mass" ritual set up to dishonor God. Think about why "jesus" is presented "dead" on Catholic crucifixes all over the world, with his head slouched over. There is a reason for that.
When someone comes to know the real Jesus Christ, there is no excusing or loving the false Mass and it's communion wafer idol. Most in the pews think they are following "god" and do not realize what is happening. I did not either, as a Catholic, I had been trained from childhood on, to see the Mass as "holy" and as "god's will" and to believe the Eucharist wafer was really "jesus's" body and blood and that only a fully and properly ordained Catholic priest had the power to turn the wafer into 'god"."

also,
the complete story, or more of it, gruesome as it is, exposing the black abomination from hell(rdd), is
available from charles chiniquoy '50 years (YES 50 YEARS) in the church (SO-CALLED) of rome'...

and keith greens 'the catholic chronicles'

and thousands of other now saved, former catholics worldwide,

as well as several now saved, once not saved catholics, who have posted here.

Jeff, you speak out of ignorance and trust conspiracy theorists about the Roman Catholic Church. Honestly, at times, I wonder if you have the Joy of the Gospel. Because you seem to always be speaking negatively about someone or something. Spend some time away from the forums and get involved in some form of joyful worship of Christ, because you are starting to sound more like the Pharisee in his prayer than the tax collector on his way home.

Jeff_56 · Feb 2, 2015

the nazis support and were supported by the rdd leaders. the murders of the saints since 300a.d., every year, likewise.

the rdd is heresy, plain and simple. every reformer for many years from martin luther on

exposed roman catholicism as not just heresy, but also directly as opposed to christ in every way --> ANTI-CHRIST.

this is just as it has always been since about 300 a.d. no good has come from the rdd. no good can come from it.

the number of people executed by the nazis are far outnumbered by the numbers of innocents executed brutally by the rdd.

the rdd is and always has been a FALSE GOSPEL. a FAKE. a FRAUD. with NOTHING at all in common with jesus or his disciples.

as the beast gains power on earth, over and above what it already has , this will be more and more clearly seen by the ekklesia (by the true believers).

those who chose willingly or not to remain in the abomination of the beast and its power die without forgiveness at the hand of yahweh himself.

the joy that they(betrayed and deceived by the rdd) can never know is broadcast gloriously throughout all heaven even by the angels when one catholic repents.

yes.

a even a catholic can be saved. if yahweh permits. but they have to completely renounce the rdd and all it's pagan and demonic doctrines and practices, and repent of it all.

Jeff_56 · Feb 2, 2015

p.s. the truth is joyful. the heretics are deadly. the conspiracy is the rdd heresy - that has been sexually perverse(spiritual adultery and worse) with all the leaders of the nations since constantine.

the truth of this is born out by their history ever since they began. it is witnessed to by all the reformers from martin luther on, and by many before him who were not called reformers but were called 'heretics' by the heretics - i.e. the rdd called them who loved the truth and stood up for it 'heretics' to try to justify slaughtering them since about 300a.d. all over the world.

the history is bloody and messy. the structure and the doctrines and the practices of the heresy are altogether demonic in origin.(while deceptively being all along made to 'look like' the truth; which deception worked against all the world, but not against the true believers - those who turn to yahshua hamashiach (jesus christ) are saved from the rdd deception ).

in the last hundred years the deception has increased thousands fold by the rdd, against its own members and the whole world, as many as they were able to trick. and they routinely, out of habit, KILL others who won't go along with their deception,
and they even KILL their own members when they consider it an effective tool to trick others , to gain more power, or more money, or just for the "JOY OF KILLING" (remember, hasatan loves to kill, steal and destroy).

the rdd IS THE ENEMY of christ and all true disciples. there cannot be any fellowship ever of that darkness/satan with light.

the true believers are instructed clearly by yahshua and in scripture to not accept anyone of the rdd who brings the false gospel and who won't repent of it. not to have a meal with them, and not to greet them in the marketplace or casual or as if they were a friend.
(not just the rdd, but anyone who brings a false gospel).

outside of that abomination(the rdd), we can rejoice with each one who is set free from darkness and partakes of the marvelous light of the truth in jesus christ. that is GOOD NEWS.

ThomistColin · Feb 3, 2015

Funny you mention Luther. By your standards he is a heretic. He was an anti-semite and believed in the sinless perfection of Mary. Or maybe...just maybe he was human.

KenAllan · Feb 3, 2015

Its interesting how you like to quote from Scripture about not judging others but yet the very same Scriptures you claim to study do tell us we are to judge others!

1 Corinthians 5:9-13
[SUP]9 [/SUP] I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people;
[SUP]10 [/SUP] I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters; for then you would have to go out of the world.
[SUP]11 [/SUP] But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he should be an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler-- not even to eat with such a one.
[SUP]12 [/SUP] For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church?
[SUP]13 [/SUP] But those who are outside, God judges.

We are not to judge those who have not receive Salvation. But we ARE to judge those who claim to be a Christian! Therefore we can judge the Catholics for the Immorality they do!

notuptome · Feb 3, 2015

mikeuk said:

I've been there and seen it with my own eyes. I have witnessed many catholics disparage their own religion as mere superstition and ritual. God spoke to Israel and said with their lips they do worship Me but their heart is far from Me. There is a great gulf between how catholics worship the church and how Christians worship God.

For you constructive dialogue requires that we dispense with doctrine. You wish to operate in realm of false piety and ritual worship rooted in superstition. God must be worshipped according to the word of God not in ceremonial rituals.

You must think me to be dumb as a box of rocks if you believe that I'm going to allow you to tell me stuff that I know is not true. You do not know me and how much exposure to the RCC I have. I'm not picking nits but driving to establish doctrinal truth. You cannot be saved apart from doctrine. It is by doctrine that Gods grace is revealed. It is by ministry of Gods Holy Spirit that men are enlightened of their need to be saved. If you are convicted by the word of God by all means respond to God. I'm not looking to add to any church but that souls might be saved and added to the body of Christ.

As soon as it gets a little hot you run away and hide. The entrance of light dispels the darkness. Atonement is made by Christ's blood and imputed to us by Gods grace. God gives full assurance to those who have trusted in His word that God will do as He has promised.

Good people go to hell everyday. Only saved people go to heaven. God has called but only a few respond.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

mikeuk · Feb 3, 2015

notuptome said:

There is no integrity in the way you argue your case. For example what some Catholics may do contrary to their calling - a straw man you use in every post , is of no relevance to the merit of Catholicism.

Such argument is not " hot" , or even useful, it is intellectually bankrupt, and not in the cause of Christ, and there are more useful things to do with time. Have no fear for me, In your terms I am already " forever saved" or so a previous evangelical sect assured me! Sadly that assurance does not stack up with scripture in my opinion. You are however welcome to your beliefs.

But I do note when I pose scriptural and doctrinal questions, like the keys given to peter, which are clearly a direct reference by Jesus back to the davidic Old Testament meaning at the time of Hezekiah, which is an office of succession subordinate to king, given to a single individual, or the fact that Petra and petros are the same in Aramaic, so Peter is indisputably the rock. You always dodge such questions, rather than offer a viable alternative, and go back to anti catholic rhetoric.

So time to move on, for me. I do not want a destructive conversation.

notuptome · Feb 4, 2015

mikeuk said:

Jesus is the foundation of the church not Peter no matter what linguistic manipulations we engage in. Jesus is described as the Chief Cornerstone set at naught by the builders. 1 Corinthians 3:11 Eph 2:20 And don't forget Peter himself in 1 Peter 2:4-7

So lets talk scripture and now it's your turn to prove that Peter is that rock in place of Christ.

The keys are the word of God. I invite you to demonstrate that they are anything else. A man of your immense intellect and study of Catholicism should be able to dispense with one so intellectually bankrupt as I.

The only works consumed in the fire are of wood, hay and stubble. Those that are of gold, silver and precious stones are only made the better.

If things turn destructive it will be at your hand.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

ThomistColin · Feb 4, 2015

notuptome said:

Ah...the accusations that make you look superior, when in fact you are doing just that. I am simply amazed at the hoops people jump through to deny Peter his position. Honestly, why not just argue what Luther did...that Peter was the "prime minister" but there is no evidence that the position would pass to another after Peter?

Even Luther and Calvin admitted Peter was the rock. They simply didn't believe the keys and the rock were permanent things given to the Church, just the beginnings of the Church.

Now, I disagree with Luther and Calvin, obviously, but they didn't go into all this craziness to deny something that is simply stated in the Scripture.

(And before you go, well we know more than they and going down the road of temporal snobbery [we're better because we are now and they are then], both men were scholars of Scripture and read Greek, and neither had a problem with Peter as the rock.)

mikeuk · Feb 4, 2015

notuptome said:

I have already demonstrated that several times, not yet contested by anyone, but in summary here again:.

The references and alignment to the davidic kingdom are everywhere both in prophesy and gospels, so clearly not an accident. The new testament is prophesied in the old. The old testament is fulfilled in the new. The old testament references are needed to understand it. Jesus did not quote scripture to mislead or by accident. For example he rode a donkey in fulfillment of prophesy because solomon had done so as a davidic king. Another davidic reference.

The meaning of the word "keys" given in the old testament davidic kingdom is specific. It is a symbol of the office of steward, which is a role subordinate to king, in charge when he was away, and office that has succession. Read the appointment of eliakim it in Isaiah 22 - not just the appointment but also the parallels on the power of office "what you open noone will shut".

Matthew 16:17-19 jesus is clearly speaking to Peter. Whilst the document is in Greek, the conversation without doubt took place in aramaic, which does not distinguish between Petra and Petros, brought in by translation to greek for effect to say "Big rock" not to change meaning , so they were clearly one and the same - not surprising he was talking to peter. So peter is the rock upon which he jesus builds. He gave peter the "keys" and in parallel to the davidic keys "what you bind on earth"

You may not like it, you may not believe it. You are welcome to believe what you will. But there is a clear underpinning of the belief that Peter was given special office, not as king, but as a subordinate, an office with succession, with powers stated to "bind on earth is bound in heaven ". He is still talking to Peter!

You have no reference anywhere at all that equates "keys" with the word of god --
which like the petra/petros distinction is straining to avoid the obvious interpretation that Peter was the rock given keys. That is what it says. That is what it meant. In my view and that of the catholic church.

As I say believe what you will. I have made the same points on keys many times, so I am not minded to carry this conversation on , if I have to keep restating issues.

notuptome said:

Please, I don't do ad hominem attacks but I am the recipient of them. I called your argument bankrupt, not you, because of the repetitive straw man you use and I tire of - which is to judge catholicism on the basis of people who do not follow the catechism, and therefore are not catholics in belief.

Even in the OP on this thread, a similar straw man is raised. That a family member was believed to have said that Mary could save her, ergo catholicism is heresy. But whatever the truth of that (most people are confused when seriously ill) catholicism does not even hint that Mary can save. So it is a false argument to judge catholicism on something it does not even believe.

Most of what is said about catholicism are myths repeated so often they have gained the status of fact. I had a major surprise when I started to study it and found that most of what is said about it is fiction. Some done maliciously by other christians, some of it because they simply have failed to understand.

Jeff_56 · Feb 4, 2015

notuptome said:

yahshua did not say to discuss scripture with heretics or with those who are anti-christ or with those who claim to be christian and still continue in heresy or any other sin(even idolatry, greed, selfishness or any at all);

no, yahshua said not to invite them to discuss anything, after they have been admonished according to scripture, and if they do not repent (as roman catholic heresy does not seek repentance) then do not even greet them - they are not faithful brothers in christ, if they are in christ at all - do not even discuss with them anything, nor have a meal with them, lest you find you are taking part in their sin (willingly or not).

they are not able to contribute anything life-giving , nor edifying, nor uplifting, in the body of christ; only deception, as long as they remain in "heresy" deceived by demons and won't repent of worshiping demons. (they do not worship god in truth nor in grace, they do not serve him, as long as they abide in the abomination heresy of the rcc)

notuptome · Feb 4, 2015

ThomistColin said:

Peter describes himself as a rock not The Rock. We who are saved by grace through the shed blood of Jesus Christ are all lively stones according to Peter in 1 Peter 2:5 & Eph 2:20 describes Jesus as the Chief Corner Stone laid in Sion according to prophecy. None of these verses convey the idea that Peter is the rock upon which the church is built.

Sound doctrine is not created without content and contextual support from the scriptures. I would tell Luther and Calvin the same thing. They may well have been incorrect or they may have been incorrectly quoted on the matter. They are as we imperfect men.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

notuptome · Feb 4, 2015

mikeuk said:

I'm still looking for your scriptural support. I read Isaiah 22 and find keys to the kingdom of David fastened as a nail in the sure place in 22:23 but then in 22:25 it is removed and cut down and falls. I'm looking for contextual evidence that there is continuation here.

If you wish to cite specific Catholic references to support your position go ahead but if they are not supported by scripture they will not be respected. Ergo the contention between Romanism and Protestantism.

I get the feeling that you do not have an appetite to defend Romanism but prefer to sulk back into the safe haven of avoidance of anything that contradicts Roman traditions. There are many faces to Romanism and in some parts of the world there is not much contention over its questionable teachings. Here in the US Rome different from Europe and Asia.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

mikeuk · Feb 4, 2015

notuptome said:

With respect read it again - in that .
"22 And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder"
Take it in context. A matter of history, The keys of that era were not small things but massive, and were worn around the neck with a robe as a symbol of office.

One more adhominem reference or insult like "sulk" and I will put you on block. Play the ball, not the man.
And since your position is a minority - catholics, luther and calvin believed Peter was special, at least do the courtesy of saying "I believe this argument is true" do not be so dogmatic in saying they were incorrect.

Read also my post on the proper context of scripture as historic fact. The first christians were not new testament christians, it did not exist as a book. It would have been pointless, few could read and books were rare. Jesus gave us instead apostles, the faith was handed on by word of mouth and tradition. and only a couple of centuries later did a (catholic) council assemble a canon of scripture on which you rely. By your argument early christians were not christians at all, because they could not argue a case from scripture, because they did not have a new testament book. History is needed to understand it. So scripture needs its proper place too. Sola scriptura is a nonsense, and a logical error not just a factual one.

My hands of course are tied. I pointed out earlier a defense of the OP points, but I respect the owners position and rules, so I will not reference catholic belief here, except and unless it is shared by others.

notuptome · Feb 4, 2015

mikeuk said:

So you expect me to believe that Christ handed Peter a massive key that Peter was to wear around his neck?

How is the kingdom of heaven opened or closed? How are sins bound or forgiven?

Really? When I am with Christ I am in the majority. Peter is special as he is an apostle but he was not the only one. Peter being Jewish wanted nothing to do with Gentiles. Paul seems to have had a more dynamic ministry than Peter and Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles. So be it.

Many of the early Christians were in fact Jewish. There were not an abundance of scrolls available at that time but there were communal readings and the Jews were taught from an early age to memorize the scriptures. Jesus as Savior is readily taught from the OT scriptures. The ministry of the Holy Spirit was to manifest Christ from the OT scriptures. God has protected His word down through the ages and has used men even some who did not know what was going on.

I have no desire to cause you to run afoul of the rules so we'll just stick to the scriptures. If Catholicism is biblical we should have no problem.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

tourist · Feb 4, 2015

notuptome said:

I believe that Peter was a 'pebble' and upon this 'rock' was referring to Jesus being the foundation of the church that Peter was commanded to build the church upon. Peter never described himself as the 'rock'. Jesus was the one who used that term to describe Peter. Jesus did give Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven. The implications and the ultimate purpose is certainly open for debate. It has to do with what Jesus considers to be the church and the kingdom of heaven.

notuptome · Feb 4, 2015

tourist said:

The posters stated position was that the two words Petra and petros are of equal value in the Aramaic.

Again the poster is attempting to establish as rite of succession through the keys to establish the pope in a position of authority over the church.

So is the passage in question literal or figurative? Literal keys or figurative keys? A more figurative view would make the word of God and the Holy Spirit as the keys opening the kingdom of God to men and establishing what is bound or released here on earth.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

mikeuk · Feb 4, 2015

notuptome said:

Fact. There is an old testament reference to "keys" a symbol of an office in a davidic kingdom. So my interpretation has scriptural basis which has been accepted by many reformers even.
.
Fact. Your reference of keys as the "word" I think you said, has no basis no reference in scripture that either you gave or I can find. Show me you reference to keys as meaning the "word" rather than a "symbol of office" and I might believe you!

You accuse catholics of being non scriptural? So far in that the score is 1-0 to catholicism

notuptome · Feb 4, 2015

mikeuk said:

Wow that's a leap. that exegesis is about as sound as taking one meaning for the word translated baptism and applying it uniformly to every reference of the word in scripture.

Keys can be and often are ideas and concepts. It is they which unlock mysteries and make plain difficult matters.

2 Tim 3:15 The scriptures are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. God places a great deal of value on His word. the 119th Psalm is replete with references to how God has magnified His word.

Actually Gods word accuses Catholics of being unregenerate. Only by the leading of the Holy Spirit can we perceive the truth of Gods word.

How do you propose to enter the kingdom of God?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Catholic Heresy (for the record)

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Senior Member

mikeuk

Guest

Senior Member

Banned

mikeuk

Guest

Banned

Senior Member

Senior Member

mikeuk

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

mikeuk

Guest

Senior Member