Download Free Apps & Games @ PHONEKY.com

DIGOUT > Topics

Subject: ROMAN CATHOLISM
Replies: 79 Views: 2137

endtimes 20.05.11 - 06:05am




I can hear many of your objections already. Youre wondering what Roman Catholicism is doing listed as a false (aberrant) religion. You thinkweve gone over the edge in profiling another Christian denomination as a cult. Youre aboutready to chuck your modem out the window, and the only reason youve read this far is out of a morbid curiosity. Well, let me take a moment to address your concerns.
I will grant you that the Catholic Church shares a large number of Biblical beliefs with evangelical Christianity: the inerrancy of the Bible, the Trinitarian nature of God, the virgin birth and deity of Jesus Christ, as well as His crucifixion and resurrection. In fact, we have no doubt that there are a number of born-again Christians within the Catholic Church. These Christians properly understand the biblical doctrine of salvation, and have developed a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. However, many of the official doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church are either un -Biblical or extra -Biblical. In fact, the Catholics use a different Bible than Protestants. Their Bible has more books within it, which accounts for some of the differences in Catholic doctrines . Furthermore, the Catholic Church has traditionally held that salvation can be attained only through observance of their sacraments. Therefore, they have set themselves apart as the only truechurch, and we must contend for the faith.
*

endtimes 20.05.11 - 06:08am
You ask, Many different denominations share different interpretations of scripture. So arentyou just splitting hairs here? The answer is no, and heres why. The differences here are not based on whether one should be baptized by immersion or by sprinkling, and they are more important than whether there will be a pre-tribulation rapture or a post-tribulation rapture. The differences here have to do with the most fundamental and foundational Christian doctrine salvation. Within Catholicism, the definitions related to salvation are different, and salvation is based on works. Because of this, Catholics do not believe that anyone can be assured of their salvation. This is incredibly sad and distressing!!
Our brief overview of Roman Catholicbeliefs is presented for two reasons to educate non-Catholics about the beliefs and doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, and to show Catholics that one can indeed be assured of salvation. Our ministry exists to contend for the truth, and todo so with love. If we shied away from addressing the doctrines of Catholicism, simply because we may not be popular for doing so, we would be failing to carry out the Great Commission. With that commission in mind, let us now take a look at the beliefs of Roman Catholicism. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 06:11am
CATHOLICISM - DEFINITIONS
Catholics and Protestants alike use many of the same words. However, the Catholic definitions of these words is often different than the Biblical definition understood by evangelical Christians. Therefore, before delving to far into exploring the beliefs of Catholicism, it is important to understand the different definitions. Below are some common terms, and how the Catholic definition differs from the Biblical definition:
Furthermore, it should be pointed out, that in order to justify the Catholic Church's doctrines of prayers for the dead, the Mass, invocation and intercession of the saints, the worship of angels, purgatory, the redemption of souls after death, and other doctrines, theChurch added new portions to the Old Testament books of Esther and Daniel, plus seven additional books: Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Ben Sirach (orEcclesiasticus), Baruch, and Wisdom. The Catholic Church refers to these extra books asdeuterocanonical works. This means that they are scriptural for Catholics, but not part of the Jewish Bible. Protestants call these additions The Apocrypha, and have never considered them part of inspired scripture due to their historical, geographical, and chronological errors, as well as for their heretical doctrines. In fact, theCatholic Church itself did not add theApocrypha to the Bible until the Council of Trent (held in the 1500's).
Grace
Bible : God's disposition toward mankind, wherein He expresses His mercy and love, so that the believer is now treated as if he were innocent and righteous.
Catholicism : A power - separate from God - which is placed into a believer. This power enables the believer to perform works that will earn him or her the right to heaven.
Salvation
Bible: The instantaneous reception of an irrevocable right-standing before God. Salvation is secured by faith, through the grace of God. It is not given only to those who have lived in a worthy way. Romans 3:23 tells us that all have sinned and fallshort of the glory of God. No, salvation is given to those the Bible describes as ungodly, sinners,enemies, and children of wrath.
Catholicism: The lifelong process whereby God and men cooperate in the securing of forgiveness of sin. This is achieved only after death (and/or cleansing from sin in purgatory), and is dependant on man's personal securing of objectiverighteousness before God; otherwise, there would be no salvation. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 06:13am
Reconciliation (atonement for sins)
Bible: All sins are forgiven at the point of salvation, because Christ's death satisfied all God's wrath against sin. (See Colossians 2:13,14)
Catholicism: Sins are only potentially forgiven, and so must be worked off through a process mediated by the Church and its sacraments over the lifetime of the believer.
Regeneration
Bible: The instantaneous imparting of eternal life and the quickening ofthe human spirit, making it alive to God.
Catholicism: The lifelong process of infusing grace (spiritual power) to perform meritorious works (in part).
Justification
Bible: The legal declaration of Christ's righteousness reckoned to the believer at the point of faith, solely as an act of God's mercy.
Catholicism: Spiritual rebirth and the lifelong process of sanctificationwhich begins at the point of the sacrament of baptism. *

6j0 20.05.11 - 06:23am
Very Powerful Topic My Love!! *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 07:02am
CATHOLICISM - SACRAMENTS
Catholics and Protestants both have sacraments. In Protestant Christianity, we have two: baptism and communion. Catholicism adds five more. In Protestantism, the sacraments are outward symbols of obedience and commitment, and are generally not considered necessary for salvation. Catholic tradition maintains that salvation can only be obtained through the practice of the sacraments. Remember the Catholic definition ofgrace. In Catholic doctrine, the sacraments imbue the Catholic with grace.
The Council of Trent declared: If anyone say that the sacraments of the New Law do not contain the grace which they signify, or that they do not confer grace on those who place no obstacle to the same, let him be anathema [cursed] (Sess. viii, can.vi). If anyone say that grace is not conferred by the sacraments ex opere operato but that faith in God's promises is alone sufficient for obtaining grace, let him be anathema (ibid., can. viii; cf.can.iv, v, vii).
The information above was obtained from the Catholic Encyclopedia . As you can see, the Catholics view parti tion in the sacraments as necessary. They go on to say that anyone who disagrees (singling out Protestants, except for Episcopalians and Anglicans) is anathema, meaningcursed. Let's explore the seven Catholic sacraments: *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 07:08am
1 - Baptism cleanses from original sin, removes other sin and its punishment, provides spiritual rebirth or regeneration, begins the process of justification, and is necessary for salvation.
2 - Confirmation bestows the Holy Spirit on the Catholic, leading to an increasing of sanctifying grace and the gifts of the Holy Spirit as well as other spiritual power and a sealing to the Catholic Church.
3 - Penance removes the penalty of sins committed after baptism and confirmation. Thus, mortal (deadly) sins are remitted and the justification lost by such sins is restored as a continuing process.
4 - Holy Eucharist is where Christ is resacrificed and the benefits of Calvary are continually applied anew to the believer.
5 - Marriage is where grace is given to remain in the bonds of matrimony in dictates with the requirements of the Catholic Church.
6 - Anointing the sick (formerly extreme unction ) bestows grace on those who are sick, old, or near death and helps in forgiveness of sins and sometimes the physical healing of the body.
7 - Holy orders confers special grace and spiritual power upon bishops, priests, and deacons for leadership in the Church as representatives of Christ for all eternity.
The Catholics maintain that these sacraments are necessary, but not all are necessary for each person. For example, Holy orders would onlybe necessary for those in Church leadership. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 07:15am
The Catholic Encyclopedia goes on to say this about the sacraments:
(3) Division and Comparison of the Sacraments
(a) All sacraments were instituted for the spiritual good of the recipients; but five, viz. Baptism, Confirmation, Penance, the Eucharist, and Extreme Unction, primarily benefit the individual in his private character, whilst the other two, Orders and Matrimony, primarily affect man as a social being, and sanctify him in the fulfillment of his duties towards the Church and society. By Baptism we are born again, Confirmation makes us strong, perfect Christians and soldiers. The Eucharist furnishes our daily spiritual food. Penance heals the soul wounded by sin. Extreme Unction removes the last remnant ofhuman frailty, and prepares the soulfor eternal life, Orders supplies ministers to the Church of God . Matrimony gives the graces necessary for those who are to rear children in the love and fear of God , members of the Church militant, future citizens of heaven. This is St. Thomas's explanation of the fitness of the number seven (III:55:1) ... *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 07:16am
(b) Baptism and Penance are calledsacraments of the dead, because they give life, through sanctifying grace then called first grace, to those who are spiritually dead by reason of original or actual sin. The other five are sacraments of the living, because their reception presupposes, at least ordinarily, thatthe recipient is in the state of grace, and they give second grace, i.e. increase of sanctifying grace (q.v.). Nevertheless, since the sacraments always give some grace when thereis no obstacle in the recipient, it mayhappen in cases explained by theologians that second grace is conferred by a sacrament of the dead, e.g. when one has only venial sins to confess receives absolution and that first grace is conferred bya sacrament of the living (see ST III:72:7 ad 2 ; III:79:3 ). Concerning Extreme Unction St. James explicitly states that through it the recipient may be freed from his sins: If he be in sins, they shall be forgiven him (James, v.15).
And what, if anything, is said of the Protestant view of the sacraments? Read on: *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 07:18am
(2) Errors of Protestants
Protestants generally hold that the sacraments are signs of something sacred (grace and faith), but deny that they really cause Divine grace. Episcopalians, however, and Anglicans, especially the Ritualists, hold with Catholics that the sacraments are effectual signs of grace. In article XXV of the Westminster Confession we read:
Sacraments ordained of God be not only badges or tokens of Christian men's profession, but rather they be certain sure witnesses and effectualsigns of grace and God's good will towards us by which He doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken but strengthen and confirm our faith in Him (cf. art. XXVII).
The Zwinglian theory, writes Morgan Dix (op.cit., p.73), that sacraments are nothing but memorials of Christ and badges of Christian profession, is one that can by no possible jugglery with the English tongue be reconciled with the formularies of our church. Mortimer adopts and explains the Catholic formula ex opere operato (loc. cit., p. 122). Luther and his early followers rejected this conception of the sacraments. They do not cause grace, but are merely signs and testimonies of God's good will towards us (Augsburg Confessions); they excite faith, and faith (fiduciary) causes justification. Calvinists and Presbyterians hold substantially the same doctrine. Zwinglius lowered still further the dignity of the sacraments, making them signs not of God's fidelity but of our fidelity. By receiving the sacraments we manifest faith in Christ: they are merely the badges of our profession and the pledges ofour fidelity. Fundamentally all theseerrors arise from Luther's newly-invented theory of righteousness, i.e. the doctrine of justification by faith alone (see GRACE). If man is to be sanctified not by an interior renovation through grace which willblot out his sins, but by an extrinsic imputation through the merits of Christ, which will cover his soul as a cloak, there is no place for signs thatcause grace, and those used can have no other purpose than to excite faith in the Saviour *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 07:24am
Luther's convenient doctrine on justification was not adopted by all his followersand it is not baldly and boldly proclaimed by all Protestants today;...[highlights added by Contender Ministries]
What the Council of Trent points out as Protestant errors, I would refer to as Biblical truth! The New Testament makes it very clear that we are justified by grace through faith. That is not Luther's newly-invented theory, that comes straight from the Bible. Look at the following passages:
This righteousness from God comesthrough faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference,for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. Romans 3:22-24, NIV
Where, then, is the boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. Romans 3:27-28, NIV *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 07:27am
Where, then, is the boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. Romans 3:27-28, NIV
The justification of the necessity of the seven sacraments is defined by Catholic theologians. The doctrine of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ is defined in the Bible itself. The Council of Trent was nothing more than a group of men attempting to reshape God in the image of man, and their conclusions cannot be considered accurate, as they are unbiblical. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 07:39am
THE EUCHARIST CHRIST
Is Jesus in a piece of bread?


Among the aberrant Catholic sacraments and doctrines, one of the least understood is that of the Eucharist and transubstantiation. While an*logous to communion in many ways, it is also worlds apart, separated by a gulf of heresy. This article will provide a basic an*lysis of the Catholic Eucharist, and reveal the ways in which it is unbiblical and a denial of the sufficiency of Jesus' sacrifice on the cross.
The Catholic Church teaches that once a Catholic priest has consecrated the wafer of bread during communion, or Eucharist asit is called by Catholics, it turns into the literal and real body, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ. It is no longer a piece of bread. It is Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread, and is therefore worthy of worship and adoration. This processof consecration followed by a literalchange from a mere wafer to the body of Christ is called transubstantiation. The following paragraphs are taken from the Catholic Catechism.
Paragraph 1374, page 383
In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained .
Paragraph 1380, pages 385, 386
The Church and the world have a great need for Eucharistic worship . Jesus awaits us in this sacrament of love. Let us not refuse the time to go to meet him in adoration, in contemplation full of faith, and open to making amends for the serious offenses and crimes of the world. Let our adoration never cease. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 07:45am
The Catholic Church similarly teaches that the wine or water taken with the wafer becomes the literal blood of Christ upon consecration by a priest. They claim that Jesus taught transubstantiationat the last supper and that the disciples were anointed with the power to change bread into the actual presence of Christ. This authority was then passed down through priestly ordination and apostolic succession.
To the early church the practice of the Lords Supper was a time of fellowship and a meal memorializing Christs sacrifice. Thebread and wine were taken in a Thanksgiving celebration that cameto be known as the Eucharist. Eucharist comes from the Greek word, eucharistia , which means thanksgiving. 1 It was a celebration held in expectation of the Marriage Supper of the Lamb that awaits all believers before the Glorious Appearing (Rev. 19:9). The transubstantiation doctrine of the Catholic Church was not taught or practiced until the middle ages, longafter the emergence of Roman Catholicism in the 6 th Century A.D.
Four Catholic Popes can be credited with the evolution of the Eucharist to include several of the traditions now held by Catholics. 2
1. Sixtus III, bishop of Rome AD 432-440 was the first to establish an altar within basilicas where the elements of bread and wine were blessed.
2. Felix IV, (AD 526-530) separated the altar as a holy place to be used exclusively for blessing the Eucharist elements.
3. Boniface II (AD 530-532) came upwith altar coverings
4. Gregory I (AD 590-604) in his early 7 th century reforms added candles, tabernacles to hold the elements, and the vestments worn by priests *

6j0 20.05.11 - 07:47am
Amen endtimes!!








Powerful Facts!!


*

endtimes 20.05.11 - 07:50am
The early church never practiced these traditions. The Mass did not change from a celebration meal of thanksgiving to a ceremonial encounter with the literal body and blood of Jesus until the 12 th century. The doctrine of transubstantiation was decreed in AD 1215 at the fourth Lateran Council.
The Catholic Church places a great deal of authority on antiquity and appearing to be an exact replica of the early church. Therefore, when history proves that most Catholic traditions are found nowhere in the early church, and are in fact the result of an evolution of doctrines asthey were passed down through a succession of Popes, the church simply rewrites history. This works because the laity are taught to never question the authority of the Church. Investigating the historical record and the evidence for the Churchs claims to authority would be tantamount to questioning the Pope.
While the Catholic Church relies heavily on a revised history to support their claims, they also use the Popes interpretation of scripture as a support. I say the Popes interpretation because the laity is not allowed to interpret scripture for themselves and must look to the church for its meaning instead. One of the verses the Catechism lists to support transubstantiation is Luke 22:19,20.
And he took bread, gave thanks andbroke it, and gave it to them, saying,This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me. In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.
Its proponents also commonly use chapter 6 in the book of John as a support for transubstantiation.
John 6:51-55 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Jesus said to them, I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink hisblood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 07:59am
My love, heres a hug for you love you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 08:01am
When Christians parti te in the Lords Supper we do it in remembrance of the sacrifice Christ made for us. The bread represents the body of Christ, and the wine represents the blood sacrificed to cover our sins. This verse and the verses in John do not teach that the bread is the literal flesh of Jesus, and the wine is the literal blood of Christ.
The key to understanding scripture is to read it in context. We know from context when to interpret scripture literally, and when the context demands a figurative or symbolic interpretation. The Bible isreplete with verses that use metaphors, symbols, and descriptiveimages to make a point or explain a teaching. Some examples of metaphors that would not be taken literally are listed below.
Psalm 34:8 Oh, taste and see that the Lord is good.
John 4:14 Whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life.
This verse does not mean that believers will literally have a fountain of water springing up inside them. It is a metaphorical way of telling us that those who accept the salvation Christ offers will have eternal life.
John 2:19 Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
The Jews thought that Jesus was referring to the Jewish temple, but as you read further it becomes obvious he was referring to His body. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 08:04am
Jesus makes several I Am statements in the book of John alone that are good examples of thesymbolic nature of some scripture.
1. I am the bread of life (John 6:35)
2. I am the light of the world (John 8:12)
3. I am the door (John 10:9)
4. I am the good shepherd (John 10:11)
5. I am the resurrection and the life (John 11:25)
6. I am the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6)
7. I am the vine.
All of these statements tell us something about the nature of Jesus, however Jesus is not a literal door that opens when we ask to receive Him. He is no more a literal grape vine than he is a loaf of bread, and He does not become either.
These are but a few examples out of many. Just as Jesus used parablesto explain things that were hard for his listeners to understand, the Bibleuses metaphors to help us understand and visualize what we read. Jesus told us to expect this in John 16:25 which reads, These things I have spoken to you in figurative language
Lets look at the context for the verses in chapter 6 of John that are often cited by Catholics. Chapter 6 begins with the story of Jesus feeding the 5,000 with two small loaves of bread and 2 fish. The next day the people Jesus had fed were looking for Him for the wrong reasons. We know this from Jesus words in verses 26 and 27 which read, You seek Me, not because yousaw the signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. Do not labor for food which perishes, but for food which endures to everlasting life.
This frames the context for verses 51-56. Jesus explains to the crowd that they should be seeking eternal life. In verse 29 He explains that eternal life comes only through belief in Jesus. He re-emphasizes this in verse 35 when he says, I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst. Again in verse 40 he says, And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 08:08am
At this point the Jews he had fed theprevious day started grumbling. They were angry that Jesus had saidhe came down from heaven. Jesus responds by once again telling themthat only the person who believes that Jesus is the Son of God will be saved, and that He is indeed the bread of life. He uses a metaphor when he says your forefathers ate the manna in the desert, and yet they died, but here is the bread that comes down from heaven which a man may eat and not die. Remember Hes repeated several times that eternal life comes through belief . Therefore, the bread must be a metaphor just as the manna is a metaphor used to describe their forefathers faith.
Jesus then tells them that whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. He goes on, For my flesh is real food and my blood isreal drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because ofthe Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever.
First Jesus compares himself to the manna that fell from heaven and sustained their forefathers as they wandered in the desert. Though they were sustained for a time by this manna, they eventually died. Jesus is saying that he is the bread that brings eternal life. This contrast is used to strengthen his main message from verse 47, which says, Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life.
When Jesus said these things he hadno bread or wine present with him. He was either speaking figuratively about believing in him for eternal life, or he was suggesting cannibalism. If he were speaking literally here, hed be directly contradicting Genesis 9:4, You shallnot eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. If you keep reading, (something Catholics citing these verses choose not to do) its made clear that Jesus was indeed speaking figuratively.
In verse 60, in response to the teachings above, the disciples said just what many of you might be saying This is a hard saying; who can understand it? *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 08:40am
Jesus responded in verses 61-64 thisway, Does this offend you? What then if you should see the Son of Man ascend where He was before? It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life. This bears repeating. The flesh profits nothing. Jesus was speaking in spiritual terms. He was not talking about his literal flesh. Jesus used the exact same word for flesh (sarx) that he used in previous verses when he tells them the flesh profits nothing. 3
Reading farther, Peter leaves no room for doubt as to what Jesus meant here. Jesus asked him if he also wanted to go away. Peter responded in verse 68, Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. Also we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. Peter did not say that theyd come to know that they must eat Jesus flesh and drink his blood. Jesus had just told them that the flesh profits nothing. Instead Peter understood his main point believing in Christ leads to eternal life.
The contrast in Jesus words here is clear. Just as Jesus does several times in scripture, He contrasts the limited and temporary benefits of the flesh with the infinite and eternal benefits of the Spirit.
I want to re-emphasize that John, chapter 6 does not deal directly with the Last Supper, or with the doctrine of the Eucharist. It has NOTHING to do with the Last Supper. Jesus had neither bread norwine present during these verses, and never even mentions wine. Nowhere in these verse does Jesus give his disciples any instruction on how to practice communion. John does not deal with the Last Supper until Chapter 13. It does not teach in chapter 6 or anywhere in the Bible that the disciples must institute a priesthood, consecrate bread and turn it into His flesh, or worship his flesh under the appearance of bread.
In addition to their belief in transubstantiation, Catholicism teaches that during the Mass and the taking of the Eucharist, Jesus is being re-sacrificed for the atonement and forgiveness of our sins. The Catholic Catechism puts it this way: *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 08:43am
Catholic Catechism, pg 351
Holy Communion separates us fromsin. The body of Christ we receive inHoly Communion (the sacrifice) is given up for us, and the blood we drink shed for the many for the forgiveness of sins. For this reason the Eucharist cannot unite us to Christ without at the same time cleansing us from past sins and preserving us from future sins.
Paragraph 1414, page 395
As sacrifice, the Eucharist is also offered in reparation of the sins of the living and the dead and to obtain spiritual or temporal benefitsfrom God.
Paragraph 1405, page 393
Every time this mystery is celebrated, the work of our redemption is carried on.
Paragraph 1366, page 380
The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it represents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross.
First, I must point out that Jesus is already inside of true believers, so there is no need to eat his flesh and drink his blood in order to have Him inside of us.
1 Col 3:16 Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you ?
Romans 8:9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you . And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.
There is also no need for a frequent,repetitious sacrifice of Christ in Catholic churches around the world. Jesus was sacrificed ONCE forALL for the remission of ALL sin. Teaching otherwise directly contradicts the Word of God.
Hebrews 7:27 Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself .
Hebrews 10:12, 14, 18 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins , he sat down atthe right hand of God.
because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who arebeing made holy.
And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin
The Bible makes it very clear here that Christs sacrifice was for all people, for all time, and covers all sin. There is only one sacrifice and itis sufficient for the forgiveness of our sins. We no longer need to continue making sacrifices as was required under the Old Covenant. The sacrifice of Christ was a one-time event. Communion is a memorial to this event that is done in remembrance of the sacrifice Christ made and the promise of His return. We are to celebrate the Lords Supper until He comes. For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes (I Corinthians 11:26). This verse does not tell us that every time a priest blesses the bread in the proper attire Jesus will come. It says to eat the bread and drink the cup UNTIL He comes. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 08:46am
There is no mention anywhere in the Bible that the Eucharist contributes to the work of redemption, that sin is forgiven by the act, that Jesus is sacrificed during the Eucharist celebration, that bread and wine change when consecrated, and there is no mention of the Mass, ever. The Bible does however have somethingto say about the act of parti ting in the Catholic Eucharist ceremony.
Acts 15:19, 20 It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from s*xual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.
Would the Apostles have instructed their followers to abstain from blood if the Lords Supper included the drinking of Jesus literal blood? You would think the Apostles wouldhave made some kind of qualification or exception here.
The Catholic church also teaches that the Eucharist is an unblood sacrifice in which the offering of theHost is the perpetuation of the sacrifice of Christ in an unblood manner to make satisfaction for sins. 4 Yet the Bible states that there is no forgiveness of sins without the shedding of blood:
Hebrews 9:22 without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.
The Bible also warns often about idolatry, or the worship of man made things. This brings up the Catholic practice of displaying the consecrated host in a monstrance.
A monstrance is a vessel used to display the host for adoration. It is usually made of gold or precious metal. Its prin l part is a circular glass through which the consecrated Host can be viewed. Surrounding this circular glass is a metal sunburst of golden rays. A cross might surmount the vessel, which stands on a pedestal and is supported by a circular base. A crescent-shaped device (lunette) or a double circle of gold or metal gilt by means of which the Host is held securely upright when exposed in the monstrance. 5
The Catholic Encyclopedia provides information on how the monstrancecame about *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 09:33am
The idea of exposing the Blessed Sacrament for veneration in a monstrance appears to have been first evolved at the end of the thirteenth or the beginning of the fourteenth century. When the elevation of the Host at Mass was introduced in the early years of the thirteenth century, probably as a form of protest against the theological views of Peter the Chanter, the idea by degrees took firm hold of the popular mind that special virtue and merit were attached to the act of looking at the Blessed Sacrament. To such extremes did this prepossession go, that the seeing of the Host at the moment of the elevation was judged to be the most vital part of attendance at Mass.
Moreover, a custom grew up, especially in Germany, of keeping the Blessed Sacrament continually exposed to view in churches. Tabernacles of great height and imposing appearance, were erectedin the most conspicuous part of the church, and there the Blessed Sacrament was reserved in a monstrance.
Catholics believe that Jesus Christ is literally present inside the monstrance in the form of the host. The Catholic Church calls for adoration of the host while it is Jesus. A Catholic website gives the following description for Eucharist Adoration:
Catholics believe that during the Mass which we attend each week (for some of us daily), the priest (during the consecration) speaks these words as he holds the communion host, ...He took bread and gave you thanks. He broke the bread, gave it to his disciples, and said: Take this all of you, and eat it: this is my body which will be given up for you . When the priest says this my body , it is at that instant when, through the miracle of transubstantiation, the bread and wine which we offer as the bloodless sacrifice to our Lord truly become the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus. It is His true Presence in the form of bread and wine. It is Christ.
Perpetual Adoration is when the priest takes a consecrated host, suchas the one described above, and places it in a monstrance. The monstrance is then placed in front of the tabernacle or on the altar of the church or chapel for adoration.
What do you actually do during adoration? You may sign up to be an adorer which allows you to schedule yourself for one or more hours per week to pray before the very presence of Our Lord, exposed in the monstrance. It means that you can have some time alone with Jesus to recite your favorite prayers, read the bible, contemplate acts of faith, hope, charity, thanksgiving, reparation, pray a rosary or do whatever type of prayerful devotionthat suits you before Our Lord. You can just sit and say nothing simply keeping Him company, just as you would with a dear friend. 6
Pope John Paul II explained Eucharist Adoration this way - Our communal worship at Mass must go together with our personal worship of Jesus in Eucharistic adoration in
next *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 09:43am
order that our love may be complete. (Pope John Paul II, Redeemer of Man)
Catholics will usually deny that they worship the sacrament if they sensethat you know what the Bible says about worshipping things made with human hands (idols). However, the Catholic Catechism starts off paragraph 1378 on page 347 with Worship of the Eucharist. Pope John Paul II also describes Eucharist worship in a speech delivered to the Forty-fifth International Eucharistic Congress, Seville, Spain, June 1993. He said:
Beloved priests, religious men and religious women, most beloved brothers and sisters, it is for me a motive of special joy to prostrate myself with you before Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament in an act of humble adoration, of praise to the merciful God, of thanksgiving to the Giver of all that is good, of supplication to Him whom is always alive to intercede for us.
The only one we should ever be prostrating ourselves before is God. John learned this lesson several times in the book of Revelation when he attempted to bow down before an angel.
Exodus 20:4-5 You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earthbeneath, or that is in the water under the earth ; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God.
Ive already presented sufficient evidence to show that Christ does not become present in a piece of bread when a priest blesses it. If further proof is needed, several disciples in the book of Acts make the statement that God does not dwell in temples.
Acts 7:48 However, the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands
*

endtimes 20.05.11 - 09:48am
Nor is Heworshipped with mens hands, as though He needed anything.
Christ is not in a tabernacle made with Human hands, nor is he in a piece of bread made with human hands. He is in heaven where he sits at the right hand of the Father.
Matthew 24:23-26 At that time if anyone says to you, Look, here is the Christ! or, There he is! do not believe it. For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the electif that were possible.See, I have told you ahead of time. So if anyone tells you, There he is, out in the desert, do not go out; or, Here he is, in the inner rooms , do not believe it.
We might add to that here he is , in the tabernacle; or, here he is, in themonstrance. Dont believe it.
FOOTNOTES
1. John Schroeder, Heresies of Catholicism, the Apostate Church, iUniverse, Inc., Lincoln, NE, 2003, pg. 193.
2. Ibid.
3. Roger Oakland, Another Jesus? The Eucharist Christ and the New Evangelization, Understand the Times, Santa Ana, CA, 2004, pg . 58.
4. Ibid., pg. 74
5. Joan Carol Cruz, Eucharist Miracles , Tan Books and Publishers, Rockford, IL, 1987, page xiii, Imprimatur, Phillip M. Hannan, Archbishop of New Orleans, April 25,1986, pages xxi-xxii.
6. What is Eucharist Adoration , http://www.medjugorje.org/adore.htm , December 12, 2002. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 09:50am
CATHOLICISM - MARIOLOGY
What is Mariology? Essentially, its the theology that affords devotion to Mary. Does this mean the Catholics worship Mary? Well,yes and no. Publicly, the Roman Catholic Church does not afford Marythe same status as Jesus. However, their reverence for her goes beyond their admiration for even the saints. The Catholic Encyclopedia details a view of Mary that it admits is not Biblical. Their view of her life and her role originate in Catholic tradition that is, the writings of the popes and theologians, rather than in the Bible.
Biblically, Mary was betrothed to Joseph. Because of her faith, she was chosen to give birth to the Messiah, Jesus Christ. She was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, and conceived Jesus. There was no physical union, and therefore Jesus was born of a virgin. While no doubt a faithful and godly woman, Mary was nonetheless just a woman. In fact, apart from Acts 1:14, Mary is not mentioned anywhere outside the Gospels (the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John). Even in the Gospels, her spiritual power and authority are almost non-existent. Neither Jesus, nor Paul, nor any other biblical writer ever gave Mary the place or devotion that the Catholic Church has given her. The New Testament epistles (letters) were written for the spiritual guidance of the Church, and have a great deal to say about doctrine and worship. Her absence from the epistles must then call into doubt the role that Catholics ascribe to her.
In Roman Catholicism, Mary (or as shes also called: Our Blessed Lady, Our Blessed Virgin, etc.) is more thanhuman. Catholic Tradition includes the following teachings: *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 09:52am
1 Marys immaculate conception : This doctrine teaches that she was born without original sin, and was therefore sinless throughout her life.
2 During her tutelage in the temple as a child, Mary received almost nightly visits by angels.
3 Marys perpetual virginity : This doctrine asserts that she had no children before Jesus (a Biblical teaching) or after Him (unbiblical).
4 Marys physical ascension into heaven : This teaches that because of her sinlessness, Mary never experienced a physical death the result of sin. Instead, she was raised bodily into the presence of Christ.
5 Marys role as Co-redemptrix andMediatrix of all graces : This doctrine holds that the obedience and sufferings of Mary were essential to secure the full redemption bought by Christ.
6 Marys right to veneration and/orworship : This teaching holds that because of her unparalleled role in salvation, Mary is worthy of special adoration.
There are three specific terms of worship in Catholicism: latria adoration that is due God alone, dulia veneration afforded to the saints, and hyperdulia special veneration given to Mary. In practice, these become practically indistinguishable. As a matter of point, Catholics pray to Mary and expect that she hears and answers all such prayers. This elevates her to a position of deity.
I have already mentioned that the role that is ascribed to Mary by Catholics is unbiblical. Let me give you more evidence of that. Below, I have included an excerpt from the Catholic Encyclopedia , where the writer acknowledges that their interpretation of a passage in the book of Genesis must be more accurate than the original Hebrew text, as their interpretation ascribes more power to Mary:
The first prophecy referring to Mary is found in the very opening chapters of the Book of Genesis (3:15): I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed; she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel. This rendering appears to differ in two respects from the original Hebrew text:
(1) .
(2) The second point of difference between the Hebrew text and our version concerns the agent who is toinflict the mortal wound on the servant: our version agrees with thepresent Vulgate text in reading she ( ipsa ) which refers to the woman, while the Hebrew text reads hu ( autos, ipse ) which refers to the seed of the woman. According to our version, and the Vulgate reading, the woman herself will win the victory; according to theHebrew text, she will be victorious through her seed. In this sense does the Bull Ineffabilis ascribe the victory to Our Blessed Lady. The reading she ( ipsa ) is neither an intentional corruption of the original text, nor is it an accidental error; it is rather an explanatory version expressing explicitly the factof Our Ladys part in the victory over the serpent, which is contained implicitly in the Hebrew original. The strength of the Christian tradition as to Marys share in this victory may be inferred from the retention of she in St. Jeromes version in spite of his acquaintance with the original text and with the reading he ( ipse ) in the old Latin version. [Highlighting added by Contender Ministries]
For the record, the text of Genesis 3:15 mentioned above is found that way only in the Catholic version of the Bible. Other versions agree withthe original Hebrew text in that the seed of the woman (Jesus) will do the crushing. The Catholic Church has changed scripture to fit with their doctrines. This tactic is the only way the Catholic Church can justify many of its teachings that areunbiblical.
In his book, Revelation Unveiled , author Tim LaHaye says this
One of the dangerous trends duringthe twentieth century in the Church of Rome is the elevation of Mary to a status just short of deity. News media reports indicate that millions have petitioned the Pope to declare her a member of the Trinity, though the official line is that it is not going to happen - yet. Already she is referred to as 'the mother of God' or 'the queen of Heaven' and in some instances appears to be the dispenser of salvation, which contradicts many Scriptures...To even suggest that anyone, even Mary the human mother of Jesus, parti tes in dispensing the gift ofeternal life is not only heresy, it is blasphemous.
As for the Catholic view of Mary as Mediatrix, let me refer you to:
1 Timothy 2:5, For there is one God and one mediator between God andmen, the man Christ Jesus *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 09:54am
CATHOLICISM - PURGATORY
Perhaps one of the most unique doctrines of Catholicism is that of purgatory. Purgatory is a place of burning torment and suffering that follows physical death, but precedesheaven. According to Catholic doctrine, the blood of Jesus cleansesus from original sin that is, the sin inherent in humans that occurred via the fall in the Garden of Eden. Each individual commits sins on top of the original sin, for which only the sinner may atone. This is achieved partly through penance and adherence to the sacraments during their lifetime. The remainingblemishes of sin must be cleansed through the fires of purgatory, prior to entering heaven. One can think of it in terms of twisted halfway house where one must be sufficiently tortured before being allowed to matriculate into decent society. The Catholic Encyclopedia defines purgatory this way:
Purgatory (Lat., purgare, to make clean, to purify) in accordance with Catholic teaching is a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God's grace , are, not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 09:59am
All sins are not equal before God , nor dare anyone assert that the daily faults of human frailty will be punished with the same severity that is meted out to serious violation of God's law . On the other hand whosoever comes into God's presence must be perfectly pure for in the strictest sense His eyes are too pure, to behold evil (Hab., i, 13).For unrepented venial faults for the payment of temporal punishment due to sin at time of death, the Church has always taught the doctrine of purgatory.
The Catholic Church teaches that faithful Catholics should pray for their loved ones who are in purgatory, in order to hasten their purification and allow them to go on to Heaven sooner.
The Catholic doctrine of purgatory supposes the fact that some die with smaller faults for which there was no true repentance, and also the fact that the temporal penalty due to sin is it times not wholly paid in this life. The proofs for the Catholic position, both in Scripture and in Tradition, are bound up also with the practice of praying for the dead. For why pray for the dead, if there be no belief in the power of prayer to afford solace to those whoas yet are excluded from the sight of God ? So true is this position that prayers for the dead and the existence of a place of purgation are mentioned in conjunction in the oldest passages of the Fathers, who allege reasons for succouring departed souls. Those who have opposed the doctrine of purgatory have confessed that prayers for the dead would be an unanswerable argument if the modern doctrine of a particular judgment had been received in the early ages.
The proofs used by the Catholic Church to support the doctrine of purgatory come from Catholic Tradition (the writings of the Popes and saints) as opposed to Biblical scripture. This isnt to say that they have not attempted to support the doctrine Biblically. The following passage from the Catholic Encyclopedia provides what it describes as proof from the Old Testament of the Bible. However, this proof comes from the Apocrypha. As stated in another section, the Apocrypha, or Deuterocanonical Books are hotly contested and are only found in the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Bibles. Most Protestants and Jews have disregarded the Apocrypha as scripture, due to numerous chronological and other errors that cast doubt on divine inspiration. During the Protestant reformation, Luther sided with Jerome, the translator of the Latin Vulgate, in deciding that the Apocryphal books should not be considered Scripture. Jerome gave his support to the Israel/Palestine Jews who rejected the Apocrypha instead of the Hellenistic Jews who readily embraced these books. While the inclusion of the Apocrypha had beendecided at the Councils of Hippo andCarthage late in the fourth century, Luther's action caused the Roman Catholic Church to react by reaffirming the canonicity of the Apocrypha at the Council of Trent in 1546. It is largely based on these books that the Catholic Church supports their peculiar doctrines, including the doctrine of purgatory. The passages mentioned below are found in the Apocrypha: *

6j0 20.05.11 - 10:02am
THANKS MY LOVE!!!!!!!!


JUST WANT TO ADD SOMETHING!





...........................................................

Testimonies from ex-Roman Catholic Priests


The following quotes are taken from the book by Richard Bennet, Far from Rome, Near to God: Testimonies of 50 Converted Roman Catholic Priests, Carlisle, PN: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1997. They are quite interesting and valuable since they give an insight to Catholicism from those who were priests in the Catholic Church and then left it to find salvation in Jesus.

Following are excerpts from only a few of the fifty testimonies in the book:

Henry Gregory Adams. Born in Saskatchewan, Canada. He entered the Basilian Order of monks and adopted the monastic name of Saint Hilarion the Great. He was ordained as a priest and served five parishes in the Lemont, Alberta area.
Sacraments. The monastic life and the sacraments prescribed by the Roman Catholic Church did not help me to come to know Christ personally and find salvation...I realized that the man-made sacraments of my church and my good works were in vain for salvation. They lead to a false security. (p. 3)
Joseph Tremblay. Born in Quebec, Canada, 1924. He was ordained a priest in Rome, Italy and was sent to Bolivia, Chile where he served for 13 years as a missionary in the congregation of the Oblate Fathers of Mary Immaculate.
Salvation by works. My theology has taught me that salvation is by works and sacrifices....my theology gives me no assurance of salvation; the Bible offers me that assurance....I had been trying to save myself on my works...I was stifled in a setting in which I was pushed to do good works to merit my salvation. (pp. 9, 11-12)
Bartholomew F. Brewer. He applied to the Discalced Carmelites, a strict monastic order. He received training of four years of high school seminary, two years in the novitiate, three years of philosophy, and four years of theology (the last after ordination). He was ordained to the Roman Catholic priesthood at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary in Washington, D.C. He eventually served as a diocesan priest in San Diego, California and entered the Navy as a Roman Catholic chaplain.
Upon questioning Rome's Beliefs, At first I did not understand, but gradually I observed a wonderful change in mother. Her influence helped me realize the importance of the Bible in determining what we believe. We often discussed subjects such as the primacy of Peter, papal infallibility, the priesthood, infant baptism, confession, the mass, purgatory, the Immaculate Conception of Mary, and the bodily assumption of Mary into heaven. In time I realized that not only are these beliefs not in the Bible, they are actually contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture. (pp. 21-22)
Relying on works. He left the Roman Catholic Church, got married and through conversations with his wife and other Christians, I finally understood that I had been relying on my own righteousness and religious efforts and not upon the completed and sufficient sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The Roman Catholic religion had never taught me that our own righteousness is fleshly and not acceptable to God, nor that we need to trust in his righteousness alone...during all those years of monastic life I had relied on the sacraments of Rome to give me grace, to save me. (p. 25)
Hugh Farrell. Born in Denver, Colorado. Entered the Order of our Lady of Mount Carmel, commonly called the Discalced Carmelite Fathers. Ordained as a priest.
Priestly power to change elements: The priest, according to the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, has the power to take ordinary bread and wine, and, by pro nouncing the words of the consecration prayer in the sacrifice of the Mass, to change it into the actual body and blood and soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. Hence, since one cannot separate the human nature of Christ from his divinity, the bread and wine, after being changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, are entitled to the worship of adoration. (pp. 28)
Temporal punishment due to sins. I knew from the teachings of the priests and nuns that I could not hope to go directly to heaven after my death. My Roman Catholic catechism taught me that after death I had to pay for the temporal punishment due to my sins. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that 'the souls of the just which, in a moment of death, are burdened with venial sins or temporal punishment due to sin, enter purgatory.' (p. 29)
Penance. Regarding life in the monastery and doing penance. These penances consist of standing with the arms outstretched to form a cross, kissing the sandaled feet of the monks, receiving a blow upon the face from the monks, and, at the end of the meal, lying prostrate before the entrance to the refectory so that the departing monks must step over one's body. These, and other penances, are supposed to gain one merit in heaven and increase one's 'spiritual bank account.' (p. 36)
The Mass and sorcery. According to the teaching of the Roman Church the priest, no matter how unworthy he may personally be, even if he has just made a pact with the devil for his soul, has the power to change the elements of bread and wine into the actual body and blood, soul and divinity, of Jesus Christ. Provided he pro nounces the words of consecration properly and has the intention of consecrating, God must come down on the altar and enter and take over the elements. (p. 39)
Alexander Carson. Baptized into the Roman Catholic Church as an infant. His priesthood studies were at St. John's seminary, Brighton, Massachusetts. He was ordained by Bishop Lawrence Shehan of Bridgeport, Connecticut in 1955 and was a priest in Alexandria, Louisiana. Also, he was pastor of Sacred Heart Catholic Church, Rayville, Louisiana.
Bible or Tradition. ...the Holy Spirit led me to judge Roman Catholic theology by the standard of the Bible. Previously, I had always judged the Bible by Roman Catholic doctrine and theology. (p. 53)
Mass contrary to scripture. In my letter of resignation from the Roman Catholic Church and Ministry, I stated to the bishop that I was leaving the priesthood because I could no longer offer the Mass, as it was contrary to the Word of God and to my conscience. (pp. 54-55)
Charles Berry. He entered the Order of Hermits of St. Augustine and became a priest after 17 years. He was given orders to continue studying until he achieved a Ph.D. in chemistry and was then transferred to the headquarters of the Augustinian order in the United States.
Superstition. In the United States the Roman Catholic Church is on its best behavior, putting its best foot forward because of its critics and opponents. In a Roman Catholic country, where it has few opponents or critics, it is a very different matter. Ignorance and superstition and idolatry are everywhere, and little effort, if any, is made to change the situation. Instead of following the Christianity taught in the Bible the people concentrate on the worship of statues and their local patron saints. (p. 59)
Idols and Statues. When I met in Cuba a genuine pagan who worshiped idols (a religion transplanted from Africa by his ancestors), I asked how he could believe that a plaster idol could help him. He replied that the idol was not expected to help him; it only represented the power in heaven which could. What horrified me about his reply was that it was almost word for word the explanation Roman Catholics give for rendering honor to the statues of the saints. (p. 59)
Bob Bush. He went to a Jesuit Seminary and studied for 13 years before being ordained in 1966. He entered a post graduate program in Rome.
Works: When I entered the order, the first thing that happened was that I was told I had to keep all the rules and regulations, that to do so would be pleasing to God, and that this was what he wanted for me. We were taught the motto, 'Keep the rule and the rule will keep you.' (p. 66).
Salvation is by faith: It took me many years to realize that I was compromising by staying in the Roman Catholic Church. Throughout all those years I continued to stress that salvation is only in the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross and not in the infant baptism; that there is only one source of authority which is the Bible, the word of God; and that there is no purgatory but rather that when we die to either go to heaven or hell. (p. 69)
Salvation by works: The Roman Catholic Church then goes on to say that in order to be saved you must keep its laws, rules and regulations. And in these laws are violated (for example, laws concerning birth control or fasting or attendance at Mass every Sunday), then you have committed a sin....'individual and integral confession and absolution constitute the only ordinary way by which the faithful person who was aware of serious sin can be reconciled with God, and with the church' (Canon 9609). (p. 75)
Works: The Roman Catholic Church adds works, and that you have to do these specific things [keeping its laws, rule and regulations] ]in order to be saved, whereas the Bible says in Ephesians 2:8-9 that it is by grace that we are saved, not by works. (pp. 75-76)
As you can see, even Roman Catholic Priests can discover the truth found in God's word and escape the error of the Roman Catholic system of works righteousness. To God be the glory.

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, that no one should boast, (Eph. 2:8-9).
*

endtimes 20.05.11 - 10:05am
The tradition of the Jews is put forth with precision and clearness inII Maccabees. Judas , the commanderof the forces of Israel, making a gathering . . . sent twelve thousand drachmas of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead). And because he considered that they who had fallenasleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins (II Mach., xii, 43-46). At the time of the Maccabees the leaders of the people of God had no hesitation in asserting the efficacy of prayers offered for the dead, in order that those who had departed this life might find pardon for their sins and the hope of eternal resurrection . *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 10:08am
If you are searching through your Bible trying to find II Maccabees, you'd better have a Catholic Bible. As part of the Apocrypha, it is not in most Protestant or Jewish Bibles. The Catholics also use the following passages from the Bible to support the doctrine of purgatory, but if you read the passages carefully, youll find the Catholic interpretations to be a wide stretch of what is written:
There are several passages in the New Testament that point to a process of purification after death. Thus, Jesus Christ declares (Matthew12:32): And whosoever shall speaka word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come. According to St. Isidore of Seville (Deord. creatur., c. xiv, n. 6) these words prove that in the next life some sins wil be forgiven and purged away by a certain purifying fire. St. Augustine also argues thatsome sinners are not forgiven eitherin this world or in the next would not be truly said unless there were other [sinners] who, though not forgiven in this world, are forgiven in the world to come (De Civ. Dei, XXI, xxiv). The same interpretation is given by Gregory the Great (Dial., IV, x x xix); St. Bede (commentary on this text); St. Bernard (Sermo lxvi in Cantic., n. 11) and other eminent theological writers. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 10:13am
A further argument is supplied by St.Paul in I Cor., iii, 11-15: For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is C hrist Jesus . Now if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay stubble: Every man's work shall be manifest; for the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire; and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is. If any man's work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work burn, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shallbe saved, yet so as by fire. While this passage presents considerable difficulty, it is regarded by many of the Fathers and theologians as evidence for the existence of an intermediate state in which the dross of lighter transgressions will be burnt away, and the soul thus purified will be saved.
Ill admit Im somewhat at a loss as to how best address their interpretation of the scripture above mostly because I dont know what logic they used to twist these meanings out of those verses. As for the passage from Pauls first letter to the Corinthians, one should back up and start on verse 10, where Paul says he laid a foundation as an expert builder, by the grace God gave him. Gold, silver,and precious stones represent durable work that will stand the test of divine judgment. Wood, hay, or straw denotes worthless work that will not stand the test, and are consumed by fire. The work of some believers will stand the test while that of others will disappear emphasizing the importance of teaching the pure word of God. As for the last verse that reads that he shall escape, yet so as by fire. In theNew International Version of the Bible, it reads, he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through flames. The best interpretation indicates that the original language was a Greek proverbial phrase, which means, bya narrow escape. A modern equivalent might be, escaped by the skin of his teeth. Paul is really trying to drive home this point: Okay, so youve been saved. Great. Wonderful. What are you going to do with this opportunity? Will you squander it, or will you live a life in service to your Lord?
One of the stranger aspects of purgatory is the belief that one can pray to the souls of loved ones who are in purgatory, and ask for intercession. Some believe that the souls in purgatory can pray for and intercede in the lives of the living. Here is what the Catholic Encyclopedia has to say on the matter: *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 10:16am
Do the souls in purgatory pray for us? May we call upon them in our needs? There is no decision of the Church on this subject, nor have the theologians pro nounced with definiteness concerning the invocation of the souls in purgatory and their intercession for the living. In the ancient liturgies there are no prayers of the Church directed to those who are still in purgatory. On the tombs of the early Christians nothing is more common than a prayer or a supplication asking the departed to intercede with God for surviving friends, but these inscriptions seem always to supposethat the departed one is already with God . St. Thomas (II-II:83:11) denies that the souls in purgatory pray for the living, and states they are not in a position to pray for us, rather we must make intercession for them. Despite the authority of St.Thomas, many renowned theologians hold that the souls in purgatory really pray for us, and that we may invoke their aid. Bellarmine (De Purgatorio, lib. II, xv,) says the reason alleged by St. Thomas is not at all convincing, and holds that in virtue of their greater love of God and their union with Him their prayers may have great intercessory power, for they are really superior to us in love of God , and in intimacy of union with Him. Suarez (De poenit., disp. xlvii, s. 2, n. 9) goes farther and asserts that thesouls in purgatory are holy, are dear to God , love us with a true love and are mindful of our wants; that they know in a general way our necessities and our dangers, and how great is our need of Divine helpand divine grace.
When there is question of invoking the prayers of those in purgatory, Bellarmine (loc. cit.) says it is superfluous, ordinarily speaking, forthey are ignorant of our cir tances and condition. This is at variance with the opinion of Suarez, who admits knowledge at least in a general way, also with theopinions of many modern theologians who point to the practice now common with almost all the faithful of addressing their prayers and petitions for help to those who are still in a place of purgation. Scavini (Theol. Moral., XI, n. l74) sees no reason why the souls detained in purgatory may not pray for us, even as we pray for one another. He asserts that this practicehas become common at Rome, and that it has the great name of St. Alphonsus in its favour. St. Alphonsus in his work the Great Means of Salvation, chap. I, III, 2, after quoting Sylvius, Gotti, Lessius, and Medina as favourable to his opinion, concludes: so the souls in purgatory, being beloved by God and confirmed in grace, have absolutely no impediment to prevent them from praying for us. Still the Church does not invoke them or implore their intercession, because ordinarily they have no cognizance of our prayers. But we may piously believe that God makesour prayers known to them. He alleges also the authority of St. Catharine of Bologna whowhenever she desired any favour had recourse to the souls in purgatory, and was immediately heard.
In summary, the doctrine of purgatory is unbiblical. Its foundation lies not in Biblical scripture, but in Catholic Tradition. The Apocrypha should not be considered part of Biblical scripture, and the verses in the New Testament were twisted to fit an already established doctrine. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 10:18am
The Roman Catholic View of Protestantism
Contender Ministries
Posted: June 27, 2002
I have never attended a Catholic Mass. The first inside glimpse I got of Catholicism occurred during one of the memorial services following the terrorist attacks of 9/11. I observed a man an archbishop, being trailed by a cadre of priests and altar boys. The bishop was dressed elegantly, and was the object of unusual (to me) veneration. When I saw the priests kneel before the bishop (who was seated on what can best be described as a throne) and kiss a ring on his hand, I felt extremely uncomfortable. It seemed so sacrilegious to me to afford another human being of what seemed like worship. It brought to my mind the Pharisees whom Jesus chastised in the gospels. It was then that I started researching Catholicism.
In other sections, I have tried to define Catholicism by its history, doctrines and practices. Another effective way to define Catholicism is to study how Catholics define Protestants. To do so, I have selected several excerpts from the definitive Catholic work, The Catholic Encyclopedia . As a reference for rebuttal, I will frequently quote from another Book the Bible. As you will see, even the Catholics see the Bible as one of the definitive differences between Catholicism and Protestant Christianity. So what are the main differences as defined by the Catholics? *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 10:20am
The Catholic Encyclopedia lists three, main categorical distinctions in Protestant beliefs: Sola Scriptura (recognition of the Bible as the only infallible Word of God), Sola Fide (the belief in justification by faith alone), and the priesthood of all believers, as opposed to a few, select men.
It is true that Christians recognize the Bible as the only infallible Word of God. It contains the fullness of the Gospel, and was divinely inspired. Catholics believe in the Bible (or at least their version of it, with several extra books added), but contend that Catholic Tradition (decrees of the various popes and councils) shares an equal footing with the Bible. Moreover, the Catholic doctrine holds that the laity(non-clergy) are incapable of properly discerning and interpretingthe Bible without help from priests and church authorities. The CatholicEncyclopedia says this of the Christian view of Biblical infallibility:
The [first] objective [or formal] principle proclaims the canonical Scriptures, especially the New Testament to be the only infallible source and rule of faith and practice,and asserts the right of private interpretation of the same, in distinction from the Roman Catholic view, which declares the Bible and tradition to be co-ordinate sources and rule of faith, and makes tradition, especially the decrees of popes and councils, the only legitimate and infallible interpreter of the Bible. In its extreme form Chillingworth expressed this principle of the Reformation in the well-known formula, The Bible, thewhole Bible, and nothing but the Bible, is the religion of Protestants.
The belief in the Bible as the sole source of faith is unhistorical, illogical, fatal to the virtue of faith, and destructive of unity.
Again, it is illogical to base faith upon the private interpretation of a book. For faith consists in submitting; private interpretation consists in judging. In faith by hearing the last word rests with the teacher; in private judgment it rests with the reader, who submits the dead text of Scripture to a kind of post-mortem examination and delivers a verdict without appeal: he believes in himself rather than inany higher authority. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 11:16am
Private judgment is fatal to the theological virtue of faith. John Henry Newman says I think I may assume that this virtue, which was exercised by the first Christians, is not known at all amongst Protestants now; or at least if there are instances of it, it is exercised toward those, I mean their teachers and divines, who expressly disclaim that they are objects of it, and exhort their people to judge for themselves (Discourses to Mixed Congregations, Faith and Private Judgment).
These excerpts clearly demonstrate the Catholic belief that common men are incapable of rightly discerning the truth by reading the Bible. Only select men with supernatural gifts (priests) are allowed to interpret the Bible among Catholics, and the Catholic Church hierarchy acts as its sole authority. In other words, Youre too dumb to understand the Bible, so well tell you what it means. The Catholics are not through insulting your intelligence yet, though. The passage continues:
The first limitation imposed on the application of private judgment is the incapacity of most men to judge for themselves on matters above their physical needs.
By pinning private judgment to the Bible the Reformers started a book religion, i.e. a religion of which, theoretically, the law of faith and conduct is contained in a written document without method, without authority, without an authorized interpreter. The collection of books called the Bible is not a methodical code of faith and morals; if it be separated from the stream of tradition which asserts its Divine inspiration, it has no special authority, and, in the hands of private interpreters, its meaning is easily twisted to suit every private mind. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 11:19am
To contend that the individual believers are incapable of understanding the Bible is the height of arrogance. In Matthew 11:25, Jesus said, I praise you Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. In writing to the church in Corinth, Paul said, When I came to you brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you exceptJesus Christ and him crucified. I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirits power, so that your faith might not rest on mens wisdom, buton Gods power (1 Corinthians 2:1-5). These are not the words of an elevated man in flowing robes. These are not the words of a man who sits on a jeweled throne while subjects kneel before him and kiss his ring. These are the words of Paul, a simple man who carried the greatest message the world has known. Pay special attention to what he said in verse 5: so that your faith might not rest on mens wisdom, but on Gods power. And let us not forget the Bereans that were praised in Acts chapter 17, verse 11 because they searched the scriptures daily to see if what Paul told them was true. The Bible is not an obtuse document reserved for an elite few; it is the Word of God for all His followers. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 11:22am
The next distinction listed is Sola Fide - the belief in justification by faith alone. In Roman Catholicism, justification is a lifelong process that can only be achieved by parti tion in the seven catholic sacraments . The Catholic Encyclopedia explains the doctrinal difference this way:
It has reference to the personal appropriation of the Christian salvation, and aims to give all glory to Christ, by declaring that the sinner is justified before God (i.e. is acquitted of guilt, and declared righteous) solely on the ground of the all-sufficient merits of Christ as apprehended by a living faith, in opposition to the theory then prevalent, and substantially sanctioned by the Council of Trent which makes faith and good works co-ordinate sources of justification, laying the chief stress upon works. Protestantism does not depreciate good works; but it denies their value as sources or conditions of justification, and insists on them as the necessary fruits of faith, and evidence of justification. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 11:31am
This definition alone is quite telling. Why shouldnt all glory be given to Christ? Nevertheless, lets continue with the Catholic viewpoint on justification by faith:
This principle bears upon conduct, unlike free judgment, which bears on faith. It is not subject to the samelimitations, for its practical application requires less mental capacity;.On the other hand, as it evades coercion, [it] lends itself to practical application at every step inman's life, and favours man's inclination to evil by rendering a so-called conversion ludicrously easy, its baneful influence on morals is manifest.As a matter of history, public morality did at once deteriorate to an appalling degree wherever Protestantism was introduced.
What the author is saying here is that justification by faith is an easy way out. The implication is that a person will accept salvation throughfaith in Jesus Christ, then ignore the Word of God and live sinfully in the world. If an individual truly places their faith in Jesus Christ, then they will desire to do His will. If someone makes no effort to repent from sinful behavior after becominga Christian, their faith would then be in question. Thats what James referred to when he said that faith without works is dead (James 2:17). If good works and parti tion in the sacraments were necessary for salvation and justification, then Jesus lied to the criminal on the cross next to Him when he said, Today, you will be with me in Paradise. This criminal was justified solely on the basis of his faith in Jesus Christ. He did not have the opportunity to parti te in ritualistic sacraments, nor did he have time to do good works. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 11:36am
Moreover, Paul told the church in Ephesus: 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- 9 not by works, so that no one can boast Ephesians 2:8-9. If that were not convincing enough, consider the following passage, Romans 3:23-28:
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished-- 26 he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.
27 Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. 28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.
The final doctrinal distinction listed in The Catholic Encyclopedia is whatit refers to as the universal priesthood of believers. In Catholicism, ordained priests are believed to be imbued with supernatural spiritual powers of mediation. Lets take a look at whatthe Catholic book has to say on this issue:
The universal priesthood of believers is a fond fancy which goes well with the other fundamental tenets of Protestantism. For, if every man is his own supreme teacher and is able to justify himself by an easy actof faith, there is no further need of ordained teachers and ministers of sacrifice and sacraments. The sacraments themselves, in fact, become superfluous. The abolition of priests, sacrifices, and sacramentsis the logical consequence of false premises, i.e. the right of private judgment and justification by faith alone; it is, therefore, as illusory as these. It is moreover contrary to Scripture, to tradition, to reason. TheProtestant position is that the clergyhad originally been representatives of the people, deriving all their power from them, and only doing, for the sake of order and convenience, what laymen might doalso.
Sects which are at best shadows of Churches wax and wane with the priestly powers they subconsciously or instinctively attribute to their pastors, elders, ministers, preachers,and other leaders.
Its important to take a look at just what a priest is. Quite simply, a priest is a mediator and an intercessor. 2 Timothy 2:5 tells us, For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Jesus became the mediator for all of mankind, disposing of the need for a priesthood. Under Jewish law, the temple priests conducted the sacrifices for the cleansing of sin. When Jesus took our sins upon Him and died on the cross, he became the final sacrifice. The following passage from Hebrews chapter 7 clarifies the eternal priesthood of Jesus:
11 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come--one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? 12 For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law. 13 He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and noone from that tribe has ever served at the altar. 14 For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15 And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, 16 one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is declared:
You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek.
18 The former regulation is set asidebecause it was weak and useless 19 (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.
20 And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, 21 but he became a priest withan oath when God said to him:
The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind:
'You are a priest forever.' 22 Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.
23 Now there have been many of those priests, since death preventedthem from continuing in office; 24 but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25 Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them .
26 Such a high priest meets our need--one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exaltedabove the heavens . 27 Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. 28 For the law appoints as high priests men who are weak; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever. [Emphasis added]
The passage is clear that Jesus is ourpriest. The priesthood claimed by the Catholic Church is extraneous and as it says in verse 18 useless.
The passages from the Catholic Encyclopedia do a good job of demonstrating the differences between Catholicism and Protestantism. The passages from the Bible illustrate clearly that the doctrines espoused by the Roman Catholic Church fly in the face of what the Bible tells us. The Bible is the complete and inerrant Word of God, and was meant to be read and understood by all of Gods children, we are saved by grace through faith, and our only priest and mediator is our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 11:42am
Doctrine of Purgatory Extinguished by Grace
Contender Ministries-by:Ben Rast


Posted: May 06, 2003
Theres no such thing as a free lunch. As a young man, I heard that clich uttered countless times by thepragmatic adult regime. It seemed almost a taunt to a teenager who was growing fast and would have appreciated some free lunches. With that phrase, we youngsters learned that we have to work for what we want in life. We also learned that the firewood had better be chopped and stacked by lunchtime.
In the divine plan that God has aut d, this maxim still applies. There is a dire consequence to be paid for sin. Romans 6:23 starts out, For the wages of sin is death This spiritual law is a constant. It does not change. It is eternal, and immutable. However, in Gods plan, a new element comes into play grace. My dictionary defines grace as divine love and protection freelygiven. FREE?! Well, yes and no. Sin still requires the penalty of death, but Gods plan is completed in the rest of Romans 6:23, but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord . The price for the lunch still had to be paid. Sin still required a death penalty. God loves us so much that Jesus offered himself up as the death sacrifice. Hepaid for our lunch. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 11:44am
Never have I heard such an affront to the power and grace of God as in the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory. What God has freely given, man has spent thousands of years trying to earn. Why? Does he not trust God to deliver? In this article, well study the doctrine of purgatory, how the Catholic Church supports this doctrine, and well findout what the Bible has to say about it.
Purgatory comes from the Latin word purgare, which means to make clean, to purify. The Catholic Encyclopedia defines purgatory as, a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in Gods grace, are, not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions . 1 In other words, Catholics believe that purgatory is a place where we go after death to be cleansed and purified of our venial (minor) sins before we can beallowed into heaven. In some traditions regarding purgatory, it is a place of purifying fire. Other traditions hold that there will be a process of purification, but the fire will be metaphorical as opposed to literal. In either case, this purifying fire is different from the fires of hell. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the d*mned . 2
The doctrine of purgatory is based largely on Catholic tradition (post-biblical writings and oral history), and was formulated into a cohesive doctrine of the church at the Councils of Florence and Trent. 3 According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, the Council of Trent (Sess. XIV, can. xi) reminds the faithful that God does not always remit the whole punishment due to sin together with the guilt. God requires satisfaction, and will punish sin 4 This portrayal of a vengeful God seems to say that the grace of God was not sufficient to forgive all of our sins. Let us examine the supports given by the Catholic Church to b*ttress this doctrine. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 11:46am
Returning to the Catholic Encyclopedia, we read, For unrepented venial faults for the payment of temporal punishment due to sin at time of death, the Church has always taught the doctrine of purgatory. So deep was this belief ingrained in our common humanity that it was accepted by the Jews, and in at least a shadowy way by the pagans, long before the coming of Christianity . 5 It seems incomprehensible to me to cite a pagan belief in the doctrine of purgatory as one of its defenses. Furthermore, the author paints an overly broad stroke over the Jews by implying that all Jews accepted this belief. Throughout history, Jews and Christians have proven over and over again that man is inherently sinful. Disobedience to God by Jews and Gentiles alike is well documented in scripture. The test of a doctrine should not rest on how accepted it is or was among other religious groups. Rather, we should look towards the Bible. Withthat, lets move on to the scriptural supports that Catholics cite for the doctrine of purgatory.
The tradition of the Jews is put forth with precision and clearness inII Maccabees . 6 The most clear scriptural reference in support of purgatory is from II Maccabees. If this book does not sound familiar to you, perhaps it is because II Maccabees is one of the books of the apocrypha (known to Catholics as the Deuterocanonical Books). The apocryphal books were not partof Jewish scripture, and are not part of the Protestant Bible. The Jewish scribes discarded the apocrypha as scripture largely because of the sundry historical and chronological errors within. As God is not the author of error, He is obviously not the author of the apocrypha. The same issues that prevented the induction of the apocrypha into Jewish scripture almost resulted in St. Jeromes refusal to translate them into the Vulgate. He objected to their inclusion in scripture, but was overruled by the Council at Nicea. These same issues are the reason that these books were excluded from Protestant Bibles during the Reformation. While Catholics rely on tradition in addition to the Bible, the Protestant reliance on the Bible alone (a belief the Catholic Church refers to as sola scriptura ) resulted in tighter constraints on what could be considered divinely-inspired. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 11:51am
That has not stopped Rome from attempting to find non-apocryphal biblical supports, though.
God forgave the incredulity of Moses and Aaron, but in punishmentkept them from the land of promise (Num., xx, 12). The Lord took away the sin of David, but the life of the child was forfeited because David had made God's enemies blaspheme His Holy Name (II Kings, xii, 13, 14). 7 The above statement is correct, but makes a poor support for purgatory. The punishments listed here were meted out during Moses, Aarons, and Davids earthly lives not in some afterlife limbo. Additionally, the instances above occurred duringthe dispensation (age) of the law prior to the dispensation of grace that commenced with the death andresurrection of Jesus.
A very common Bible verse cited by Catholics as a support for purgatory is Matthew 12:32, in which Jesus said, And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shallbe forgiven him: but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come . The Catholic explanation of this passage holds that the world to come is purgatory. They contend that there is a purgatorial world to come in which sins not forgiven in this world may be forgiven (with the exception of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit). The Greek word aion is used here for world. Of the128 times aion is used in the Bible, most of its uses refer to an age, or period of time. In fact, our current word eon comes from this word. Most scholars agree that when Jesusmentioned this world, He was referring to the Age of the Law into which He was born. The world to come to which He referred, is the Church Age, or Age of Grace that began with his resurrection and continues today. To say that this verse alludes to purgatory is to make a huge stretch that simply does not match the facts. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 12:24pm
Modern Protestants, while they avoid the name purgatory, frequently teach the doctrine ofthe middle state, and Martensen (Christian Dogmatics, Edinburgh, 1890, p. 457 ). 8 Here, they reference the work of Danish Episcopal Bishop Hans Martensen. Itis well known that Bishop Martensen also had a proclivity for mysticism and theosophy, and therefore might not make the best witness to orthodoxy. Regardless ofMartensens personal theological beliefs, we have already stated thatsupport of a doctrine by other groups or individuals is not an acceptable support. Furthermore, the broad stroke of the authors brush if far too broad in painting Protestant beliefs on this issue. He would have been more accurate to say that SOME modern Protestants believe in a middle state.
Now that we have examined the Catholic supports for purgatory, let us turn to the Bible to examine whatthe Word of God says on the matter. For the sake of space, I will list several portions of scripture consecutively before making any additional comment.
1 Corinthians 6:10-11
nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of youwere. But you were washed , you were sanctified , you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God . [emphasis added] *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 12:27pm
Romans 8:1-4 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sinoffering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit .
Ephesians 2:4-10
But because of his great love for us,God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions--it is bygrace you have been saved. And Godraised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--not by works, so that no one can boast . For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, whichGod prepared in advance for us to do . [emphasis added] *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 12:30pm
Colossians 1:21-23
Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior. But now he has reconciled you by Christ's physical body through death to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation --if you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel . [emphasis added]
Romans 3:21-28
But now a righteousness from God , apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe . There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished --he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus .
Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law . [emphasis added]
We have seen a common theme here. Weve read words like justified, sanctified, and made holy. In Catholic practice, justification is achieved through adherence to the seven sacraments. Yet weve just read that we are all justified by grace through our faith in the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Weve also read that due to Christs atoning sacrifice, God seeks no further punishment for those who have accepted that free gift. Perhaps nowhere else in the Bible is the doctrine of purgatory more heavily refuted than in the following passage:
Hebrews 10:8-18
First he [Jesus] said, Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them (although the law required them to be made). Then he said, Here I am, Ihave come to do your will. He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all .
Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins , he sat down at the right hand of God. Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.
The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says:
This is the covenant I will make with them
after that time, says the Lord.
I will put my laws in their hearts,
and I will write them on their minds. Then he adds:
Their sins and lawless acts
I will remember no more . And where these have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin . [emphasis added]
What a wonderful assurance! Because of the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ, we have been forgiven. There is no longer any sacrifice required. That is what purgatory is all about an additional sacrifice for venial sins. To say that purgatory is a necessary purification is to deny that the graceof God is sufficient. What a tremendous blessing to us that God has shown His unbounded love for us through His grace! 1 John 1:9 says, If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. In 2 Corinthians 12:9, Paul said that Christs grace was sufficient for him. Indeed, Christs grace is sufficient for us all. Praise God!
1. Catholic Encyclopedia ; Volume XII, Copyright 1911 by Robert Appleton Company, Online Edition Copyright 2003 by Kevin Knight
2. Catechism of the Catholic Church ; Part One, Section Two, Chapter Three, Article 12, p. 1031.
3. Ibid.
4. Catholic Encyclopedia ; Volume XII, Copyright 1911 by Robert Appleton Company, Online Edition *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 12:34pm
The Fallacy of Catholicism's Papacy
JOHN
SCHROEDER
Contender Ministries
Posted: August 9, 2003
Of the numerous doctrines Roman Catholics must believe under pain ofgrievous sin, there are two upon which the entire religion is dependent for its continued existence. Without these two foundational doctrines, the Roman Catholic religion comes crashing down to the ground of irrelevancy. In my Catholic childhood, I learned these two doctrines before I could read or write. To the question, Which is the one true Church founded by Jesus Christ? I learned as a little shaver to answer, The Catholic Church is the one true Church founded by Christ. To the second question, And upon what did Jesus found His Church? my response was, Jesus founded His Church on the rock of Peter who wasthe first pope.
When the Lord Jesus saved me at the advanced age of 52, it became obvious very soon thereafter that there is something radically wrong with those two foundational doctrines.
And, since the first - the true Church claim - rests squarely on the allegation that Peter was ordained to be its first pope, it is quite appropriate to seek in the Scripturesproof that Jesus really did give Petersuch an assignment. There, in the inerrant Word of God, we have every right to expect to find Peters appointment clearly set forth, established as a fact beyond a shadow of a doubt. What we do find, though, is what follows.
The English word, pope, comes from the Latin word, papa, which means father.
But our Lord told His disciples, (and us through them), call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. (Matthew 23:9) This had to be meant in a spiritual sense since we all have earthly fathers, while our heavenly Father is a spirit to be worshiped in spirit and truth. (John 4:24) And based on this admonition from Jesus, there shouldnt even be a Catholic priesthood much less a papacy, for all Catholic priests are addressed as, Father. More on thatlater.
On another occasion, when His Apostles were disputing about leadership matters, Our Lord called them together for a disclosure of His organizational plan. He said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall NOT BE SO AMONG YOU: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you,let him be your servant. (Matthew 20:25-27) From this, it is clear Jesus was strongly opposed to any prince or princes exercising dominion over His flock. *

endtimes 20.05.11 - 12:42pm
Historically, it was not until the 3 rd century, nearly 200 years after our Lords return to His heavenly throne, that a bishop of Rome one of hundreds of independent bishops existing at that time cited Matthew 16:18 as evidence Peter had been appointed bishop of Romeand head of the Church. This was a brazen grab for power by Calixtus 1 whose interpretation of Matthew 16:18 contradicted that of the leading theologians of his day. That grab for power died an ignominious death when Tertullian, bishop of Carthage, and others, called Calixtus1 a usurper. From our vantage point 2000 years later, it is unimpeachable proof that Rome lieswhen it claims the office of the papacy has been in existence from the time of Peter.
Remember, if you will, the episode at Caesarea Philippi. There, Jesus asked His Apostles, Who do YE say that I am? It was Peter who responded for the twelve with this statement of FACT: Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. Then said our Lord, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, that thou art PETER, and upon this ROCK I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matthew 16:17, 18) In English, Latin, Aramaic, and other languages the words Peter and rockare entirely different. Unfortunatelyfor Roman Catholics whose beliefs rest heavily on the papacy, Greek is a far more precise language. *

Reply
DIGOUT Forum

DIGOUT

Top
Groups
Prodigits