J
Catholic Heresy (for the record)
- Thread starter RoboOp
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I know in Gal 1:7 Paul speaks to the same thing that is shown in the counsel in Acts 15:1-9. We can even see Peter in Acts 10:44-48 mentioned somewhat validated in Acts 15:8 also) But in Gal 1:7 when Paul says there are "some that trouble you" the certain ones (which went out from them) which are mentioned in Acts 15:24 preaching "except ye be circumcised after the manner of ye cannot be saved" are of the same James said of them which "trouble you with words" subverting their souls unto whom he states they gave no such commandment (concerning cicumcision). Concerning these same is why Paul said, Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel (which was not another) and that had nothing to do with Jesus own words in Mark 16:16 when Jesus said, He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned but rather of certain coming down from Judaea (as shown in Acts 15:1) and again shown in the counsel itself of the sect of the Pharisees (who believed) but were teaching circumcision after the manner of Moses and the keeping of the law as is shownin Acts 15:5 not of being baptized or faith in Jesus Christ.
Just as the same as is shown in Acts 15:11 or "the perverting of" the gospel itself away from grace of Jesus Christ to them following Moses (Jesus called their accuser) these saying "except ye be circumcised and keep Moses ye cannot be saved" the apostles responded, " But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they" (See also Acts 10:45-48) even though Peter still commanded their baptism (who actually mentions the forbidding of these ones water in order to do so) in Acts 10:47.
Then if you go through Gal 5:1 you see there the same in the counsel itself as they what they were adding to the necks of the disciples (which concerned circumcision after the manner of Moses and the keeping of the law) that which is called the yoke in Acts 15:10. Paul likewise says the same here in Gal 5:1 saying, "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage". The next verse (Gal 5:2) Paul goes right into "Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing". Just as he continues in Gal 5:4 saying, Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace (Just as it shows these same in Acts 15:5). Follow Paul through to where he speaks also (of the same as are shown in the Acts counsel) "of they which trouble you" as Paul mentions the same in Gal 5:10 and then says, I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be. (See also Gal 1:7 & Acts 15:24) Its of the same that are troubling them. I would think its sort of perverted to make this about being believing in Jesus Christ and being baptized when it has to do with circumcison after the manner of Moses and keeping the law (which come by him) in contrast to the grace and truth which come by Jesus Christ.
I had thought Paul did a great job showing the whole thing together in Galations where you can refer to both pictures and see in them in a sort of complimentary form between the two. Him showing that which is the yoke, the circumcision, the justification by the law and them which trouble you is another gospel, because these of Judaea who believed, but it wasn't by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, but these had nothing to do with being baptized, since the sect of the Pharisees are shown rejecting even water baptism (even as the same come by John in Luke 7:30) but did cleave more to circumcision (as they even called themselves "the circumcision") but these also were aware that Jesus baptized more disciples then John but not Jesus personally (even then) but rather his disciples baptized as is shown in John 4:1-2 and even afterward just as we see in Philip baptizing the enuch in water in Acts 8:36 and Peter mentioning baptism in the same in Acts 10:47. And I believe Jesus worded it like this in Mark 16:16 because there would be situations one believed but there was no water available to be baptized in or just could not and so Jesus said, He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. To me it just seems like common sense. But if folks believe and are able to be baptized and reject doing so because they just dont want to get their hair wet or something along those lines and feel justified in rejecting doing that for those reasons, or feel as the Pharisees (who rejected John's) one can free to do that as well, that is shown also (as opposed to those who justified God in being baptized by him) both are shown. But I dont believe they didnt reject water baptism because there wasnt any water (or because they were locked up in some prison wanting to but just couldnt) or were foisted up upon some cross where it was virtually impossible for them to do so (as such a situation might warrant the impossibility) if after such a time it become known believing and being baptized was something expected. I feel Jesus even leaves that open as he does for those particularly rare cases, not to excuse everyone from it. But that often depends on who you are speaking to.
We believe the gospel, which is God sent His Son, that Jesus died, was buried, his resurrection (the same is also backed by the law and prophets) and out of which (for example) Philip preached the gospel to the enuch, wherefrom he himself (a living witness) used these to testify of Christ (who gave them a witness). And this is by his grace and not as through the law. But the two are shown going at it even then troubling the Gentiles, because this is a saved issued. And they say "except ye be this" (or "except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses and keep the law) ye cannot be saved", when the apostles were like we said no such thing. And as the law come by Moses and grace and truth by Jesus Christ, and its by the same grace Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" But there, Jesus did not say He that believeth and is circumcised (after the manner of Moses) shall be saved, but neither did Paul (Gal 5:2 & 6:12) who was a former Pharisee (of which sect he was of) and of the same sect it also says "But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him" (John) even as it shows water baptism in Philip and the enuch in Acts 8:36 which was commanded by Peter (of the Gentiles) in Acts 10:47 who were the same that believed by faith (In Acts 15:7 -9) who he commanded to be baptized in Acts 10:48 but he did not advocate the circumcision (in Acts 15:5-9) shown later
Just as the same as is shown in Acts 15:11 or "the perverting of" the gospel itself away from grace of Jesus Christ to them following Moses (Jesus called their accuser) these saying "except ye be circumcised and keep Moses ye cannot be saved" the apostles responded, " But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they" (See also Acts 10:45-48) even though Peter still commanded their baptism (who actually mentions the forbidding of these ones water in order to do so) in Acts 10:47.
Then if you go through Gal 5:1 you see there the same in the counsel itself as they what they were adding to the necks of the disciples (which concerned circumcision after the manner of Moses and the keeping of the law) that which is called the yoke in Acts 15:10. Paul likewise says the same here in Gal 5:1 saying, "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage". The next verse (Gal 5:2) Paul goes right into "Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing". Just as he continues in Gal 5:4 saying, Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace (Just as it shows these same in Acts 15:5). Follow Paul through to where he speaks also (of the same as are shown in the Acts counsel) "of they which trouble you" as Paul mentions the same in Gal 5:10 and then says, I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be. (See also Gal 1:7 & Acts 15:24) Its of the same that are troubling them. I would think its sort of perverted to make this about being believing in Jesus Christ and being baptized when it has to do with circumcison after the manner of Moses and keeping the law (which come by him) in contrast to the grace and truth which come by Jesus Christ.
I had thought Paul did a great job showing the whole thing together in Galations where you can refer to both pictures and see in them in a sort of complimentary form between the two. Him showing that which is the yoke, the circumcision, the justification by the law and them which trouble you is another gospel, because these of Judaea who believed, but it wasn't by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, but these had nothing to do with being baptized, since the sect of the Pharisees are shown rejecting even water baptism (even as the same come by John in Luke 7:30) but did cleave more to circumcision (as they even called themselves "the circumcision") but these also were aware that Jesus baptized more disciples then John but not Jesus personally (even then) but rather his disciples baptized as is shown in John 4:1-2 and even afterward just as we see in Philip baptizing the enuch in water in Acts 8:36 and Peter mentioning baptism in the same in Acts 10:47. And I believe Jesus worded it like this in Mark 16:16 because there would be situations one believed but there was no water available to be baptized in or just could not and so Jesus said, He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. To me it just seems like common sense. But if folks believe and are able to be baptized and reject doing so because they just dont want to get their hair wet or something along those lines and feel justified in rejecting doing that for those reasons, or feel as the Pharisees (who rejected John's) one can free to do that as well, that is shown also (as opposed to those who justified God in being baptized by him) both are shown. But I dont believe they didnt reject water baptism because there wasnt any water (or because they were locked up in some prison wanting to but just couldnt) or were foisted up upon some cross where it was virtually impossible for them to do so (as such a situation might warrant the impossibility) if after such a time it become known believing and being baptized was something expected. I feel Jesus even leaves that open as he does for those particularly rare cases, not to excuse everyone from it. But that often depends on who you are speaking to.
We believe the gospel, which is God sent His Son, that Jesus died, was buried, his resurrection (the same is also backed by the law and prophets) and out of which (for example) Philip preached the gospel to the enuch, wherefrom he himself (a living witness) used these to testify of Christ (who gave them a witness). And this is by his grace and not as through the law. But the two are shown going at it even then troubling the Gentiles, because this is a saved issued. And they say "except ye be this" (or "except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses and keep the law) ye cannot be saved", when the apostles were like we said no such thing. And as the law come by Moses and grace and truth by Jesus Christ, and its by the same grace Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" But there, Jesus did not say He that believeth and is circumcised (after the manner of Moses) shall be saved, but neither did Paul (Gal 5:2 & 6:12) who was a former Pharisee (of which sect he was of) and of the same sect it also says "But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him" (John) even as it shows water baptism in Philip and the enuch in Acts 8:36 which was commanded by Peter (of the Gentiles) in Acts 10:47 who were the same that believed by faith (In Acts 15:7 -9) who he commanded to be baptized in Acts 10:48 but he did not advocate the circumcision (in Acts 15:5-9) shown later
B
BrotherJustin
Guest
I love you dearly, but honestly? We finally -- FINALLY -- got this off the top few pages of this forum and you do this?
Rookie mistake. Thanks.
It would have been on page 23 or 24...I love you dearly, but honestly? We finally -- FINALLY -- got this off the top few pages of this forum and you do this?
B
BrotherJustin
Guest
Look, lady - If you are not willing to work towards resolution with me, then: Stop pestering me!
We try to welcome everyone to our site including people who grow up with Catholic tradition because of course we want to lead people to the truth.
But sometimes it's perceived that we tolerate error and heresy. Please understand first of all that we don't screen every thread and post in this forum. YOU can help with that.If there's something that you really think we should deal with, then use the Report button (there's a Report button on every post). But please understand that there will be some error and we don't remove all error or even all heresy from the site, partly because it's an opportunity for Christians to correct it and respond with the word of God. But if there's too much of it or too much from one person then we do some housecleaning. We certainly don't want our site to be dominated by Catholic heresy or whatever heresy or error, and we don't want people to get the impression that we just tolerate all of that.
So for the record, Catholicism is heresy. That's what the admins of this site believe.
Mary WAS A SINNER.
She needed a savior, just like you and me.
She is NOT the "mother of God". God has no mother, because God is God. Yes Jesus is God, and Mary was his mother, but we have to understand the dual nature of Jesus. He was 100% God yes, and also 100% man. Mary was his mother as a man, not as God. No where does the scripture refer to Mary as the "mother of God". And in fact, she's not even mentioned in all the epistles. All the New Testament instruction to the church is all about Jesus, not Mary. They never said "hail Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners". They always said JESUS .. JESUS... JESUS.
This is preaching to the choir for most people here. But it regularly happens that we start to accumulate Catholics here who really promote and argue their Catholicism, along with all the heresy.
So for the record, if anyone wants or needs to hear it, we don't agree with Catholic heresy. And yes it is heresy to exalt any other human being as sinless to the same level as Jesus (as the Catholics do with Mary -- they actually teach that Mary was sinless like Jesus!!!), and put equal focus on a person other than Jesus.
At the same time, we understand that no one is born a Christian. That's why Jesus said you must be born again. So we welcome all who are seeking -- Catholics, Muslims, homosexuals, and even protestants who are "Christian" only by tradition -- to experience our fellowship here on this site and learn the truth that Jesus is the way and the truth and the life and no one can come to the father except through Him. And there is only one God, and one mediator between God, the man Christ Jesus. Because he was both 100% man and 100% God, that makes him the perfect mediator between man and God. That's why the scripture also tells us to go straight to Jesus -- go to the throne of grace with confidence, knowing that he can understand our weaknesses and everything, since he lived as a man like us (and even experienced all temptation). Hence we don't need Mary to go to or go through -- that defeats the purpose of Jesus.
I saw my mother-in-law die before my eyes putting her faith in Mary. Days before she died I asked her if Mary can save her and she actually said yes. Then in her dying moments, my father-in-law pushed me in front of her to pray for her as she was dying before our eyes. I simply prayed out loud in front of everyone that she would put her faith in Jesus, and ONLY JESUS. There was protesting in the background "wala na Maria? wala na Maria?", which is Filipino language for "No Mary?? No Marry??". You see how deceived they all are. It is sad. You see how the devil uses that poison to add something to Jesus.
So I hope it's clear what we believe and we hope that we can promote the truth here in love.
RoboOp, I agree with everything you said. Mary was not sinless, and yes, many Catholics have created a cult of Mary. And many Catholics put their faith in the legalism of the Church and miss the Grace of God that the Apostle Paul clearly emphasized. Crystal. Hundreds of times. But, there are Catholics who find the grace of God in a born-again relationship, and stay in the Church, and I have heard priests who clearly taught a born-again Gospel. But, the Catholic Church needs a revival-- a Reformation that Paul talked about, but I forget which letter and can't look it up.
Martin Luther is a hero of the Church. He confronted teachings of the church that were clearly corrupted, like in the movie, "Luther," where "indulgence preachers" would go from town to town and scare people to raise money for the church and say, "put a coin in the pot and a relative gets out of purgatory." He also confronted a theology that had become almost like science or math. There is idolatry throughout the church, and it's frightening, the control it has over people. I've seen people in church by their expression are overcome by foreign spirits. IN some ways, the church has become a cult, clearly. They do not allow any dissent or debate in their church newspapers, or sometimes in their websites.
But, there are good things in the Roman Church as well. Charity. Sometimes a strong Christian voice in the world about abortion and other conservative values. But they have made tradition an idol in many ways. It will take a brave bishop or pope to set aside the tall caps that are an embarrassment to the church.
But, there are some things that they have that are a good witness. ONe of them is how they honor the bread and wine with quiet meditation. I know that the bread and wine alone can not save people, but is a remembrance for people who are saved and believe they are children of God (sons and daughters) and are not caught up in the idolatry of saving themselves. Consider the lax way many protestants remember the bread and wine. And the Bible does imply that they used real wine, or watered down wine 3 parts water and 1 part wine. But one pastor said that fermentation was not allowed in the temple and the Bible does say "fruit of the vine." And using wine can be impractical with young people and christians who have never touched a drop of wine. But, it's also wrong to say "we take this juice" and I've heard of some christians who might celebrate the bread and fruit of the vine, anywhere-- in a restaurant, using bread on the table and whatever juice might be available. Paul speaks against this. I'm sorry, I don't have time to look up the verse... And I don't think it honors the LORD to remember the Last Supper with loud rock music blaring-- it just isn't peaceful, and doesn't honor the sacredness of the moment, even though I like Christian rock music in the right balance.
I don'tmean to support any teachings of the Catholic Church, and until the said "revival" takes place, I would not direct people to the church because the Lord established a "New Covenant of Mercy and Grace," not a new covenant of law and religious legalism and religiouis performance. We can NEVER earn our way into God's favor. At the same time, it is a valid feedback for evangelicals that people can be saved without any sign of repentance or change in their hearts and lives...
That's what I meant by a "marriage" between Protestant and Catholic. Honoring both the wedding and the Marriage. But Christians told me in Christian chats many years ago-- people are only married once to Heaven, just like, at least ideally, in life. The Church teaches a religious performance salvation which is wrong. But, some evangelicals teach salvation without a marriage. Anyway, I've got to run. I'll drop back by this evening, and explain why I am still faithful to my Greek Church roots, while being a born-again Christian. The church helped with some aspects of my deliverance which I can explain later. But, I agree with everything you said. No church can save people or Mary without a born-again relationship of God's Grace through receiving the Spirit of Christ in heart and life. And it can ONLY be received as a free-gift.
But, I talk about it too much-- The LORD says:
"Let's see you WALK that talk!!
Let's see it on the STREET!!"
"Let's see it on your FEET!!"
"i'M tired of your empty words!"
I"m tired of your empty TALK!"
Let's see a "little less talk and a LOT more action..." like the country song lady sings...
very cute-- and Jay Leno, not that I'm a fan of the show, said once-- "recently, a priest and a nun were caught making out inthe back seat of a car...'" That's the best news the Catholic Church has had in a long time..."
Ok, I said Iwould explain why I honored by Greek Church roots. First of all, the Bible says that "vows to God are binding." It's better to obey God and bring the Apostles Paul's message of Grace (which he got from the LORD), to the church, rather than preaching to the choir in a church that already has grace.... This is a mission from God not to bail on Catholics, but, to bring them the message of grace-- it would be wrong to just walk away from people who need to hear that statues of Mary can not save them, and that church performance can never earn God's favor,and it is an offense to God to try and do so. It's like saying, the blood of Christ is not enough to save me... I need to do more-- and people need to know that doubting their salvation is usually an expression of pride and it can turn into lying to God's Spirit which is the only unforgiveable sin. IF we don't believe we are saved, then we are calling God and ourselves liars.
The other thing was that a priest anointed me with oil, which is something that Protestants do also, and I heard cursing in my mind, becuase I have had issues of oppression/depression in the past. Everytime I would annoint my head with oil, which is in the Bible, I would hear cursing. So, this confirms the Bibles teaching that being anointed with oil with prayers is a powerful tool against the devil. ANd sometimes when I would leave muy apartment for church, either a Greek religion church, or a Baptist church, I would hear cursing. So, this tells me that the devil fears me going to a Baptist church, but also a GReek church because I'm bringing the message of grace to them-- SO--GOD IS WINNING AND ALL THINGS WORK TOGETHER FOR GOOD FOR THOSE WHO LOVE GOD AND ARE CALLED ACCORDING TO HIS PURPOSE.
Don't believe the lying deceiving spirits that say people are beyond redemption-- that's an easy trap to fall into when a person is depressed and feeling condemned. But feeling condemned is not reality. feelings can not create reality-- God creates reality. Feelings are unreliable witnesses of reality. John said, "if your heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart."
So, don't pay attention to the deceiving spirits-- they are full of sh*t, and have no authority to condemn anyone, unless people give it to them by believing them instead of the voice of truth--the Holy Spirit. Why listen to losers when we can listen to a God who loves us unconditionally-- Does it make sense to condemn ourselves if God does not condemn us? That's what demons want--- they are fat, lazy pitiful lazy toothless lions, that would prefer that people condemn themselves and save them the effort, even though they have no authority to condemn anyone, unless a person gives them that authority by listening to their cynical lies and deceptions. Why be controlled by a mirage? Does that make sense?
It's the voice of pride that says, a person would rather condemn themselves rather than submit to God's only way of salvation-- So, tell them to take a flying leap into the abyss, and that you are with Jesus. That's all we have to do-- say yes to God, and confirm it with love in action---
Preach it Sistahhh!!! Awesome... One thought though...often when people who are moderately or severely oppressed by malicious spirits, which secular psychs don't even believe in... they are generally not ABLE to believe. And there are so few places where people can get help for these distressing experiences.
Preach it Sistahh!! One thing though. When people are moderately or severely oppressed by tormenting spirits, which psychs don't even believe in (they would if they experienced it), they are not ABLE to believe.
What we must know and understand is the Catholic Church has walked away from the Truth from God to follow the lies from Satan.
How can anyone claim they follow Jesus when they are on their knees praying to Mary? They cannot!
Jesus said He is the Way, the Truth and the light. He did not say He AND Mary are the way, the Truth, the light.
This is why today Catholics who follow Mary cannot enter into Heaven.
How can anyone claim they follow Jesus when they are on their knees praying to Mary? They cannot!
Jesus said He is the Way, the Truth and the light. He did not say He AND Mary are the way, the Truth, the light.
This is why today Catholics who follow Mary cannot enter into Heaven.
P
PeacefulWarrior
Guest
Do you believe that God and Mary
had a child together and Mary was the mother
of that child and that child was the only begotten Son of God
before He became a man?
I am not a Catholic but I believe this is true.
Do you believe it is true?
No.
The Son of God had no beginning! The Son of God did not come from God and Mary because the Son of God is God.
The body from Mary was used by the Son of God to walk on the Earth. The son of God did not come from the union of God and Mary.
The Son of God was at the beginning. It was the Son of God who created everything.
God the Holy Spirit and Mary produced a body used by the Son of God.
I see you are not a Catholic and i also see you are not a True Christian either.
The Son of God had no beginning! The Son of God did not come from God and Mary because the Son of God is God.
The body from Mary was used by the Son of God to walk on the Earth. The son of God did not come from the union of God and Mary.
The Son of God was at the beginning. It was the Son of God who created everything.
God the Holy Spirit and Mary produced a body used by the Son of God.
I see you are not a Catholic and i also see you are not a True Christian either.
J
jaybird88
Guest
Calling out error and heresy and giving the truth about something is not hate. Try again.
It's love to show others the error so we can be informed and make a stance against it rather than to allow others to succumb to this deadly heresy.
Yes it's surprising that the thread was revived though.
J
jaybird88
Guest