Donald Trump: Biography, Debt, Economics, Real Estate, Finance, Film Business (2014)
Donald John Trump, Sr. (born June 14, 1946) is an American business magnate, investor, author, television personality, and candidate for President of the ...
Mini BIO - Steve McQueen
Watch a video biography about Steve McQueen's life, including his roles in "The Magnificent Seven" and "Bullitt," his nickname "The King of Cool," his marriage ...
See our video "Are Catholics Christian?" Answered by Priest for 22 Years
Richard Bennett & the Catholic Catechism" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu4fjSTRgRI&list=UUQ_EDvOtDAAWfCvGUhd6y3A.
See this former Dominican priest's article on the same subject at
//www.bereanbeacon.org/article/sorted/01_On_Catholicism/Are_Catholics_Christians.pdf
.
See our playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin
Mary" with 125 videos at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715. The following is
the article by former Roman Catholic priest for 22 years Richard Bennett
(his website is www.BereanBeacon.org) called, "Are Catholics
Christians?" The Catholic Church presupposes itself to be Christian.
Nothing could be farther from the truth; yet, the Catholic Church has
presented and promoted herself in that guise particularly since the close
of the Second Vatican Council in 1965. A primary, non-negotiable goal of
Vatican Council II was to lay the groundwork and to establish the rules and
parameters for a multifaceted, ecumenical outreach. Evangelical Christians,
now called "separated brethren", rather than "heretics",1 are the primary
target of Catholic ecumenism. The goal is to draw them into the Roman
Catholic fold.2 Thus, in the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church, the
word "Christian" occurs more than 100 times in these official teachings.
Buzzwords such as "dialogue", "ecumenism", and "social justice" are being
used under the guise of promoting true Christianity while advancing the
Roman Catholic agenda.
Assurances to Evangelicals Negated
Evangelicals are assured that Catholics who believe in the incarnation,
death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ are true Christians, even
though they misunderstand some of the "technicalities" regarding salvation.
Such reasoning is negated by the fact that Catholicism differs from
biblical faith—not only on minor details, but more importantly on what is
essential for one’s salvation.
The most dangerous aspect of Catholic Church doctrine is that it appears to
be based on the great, indispensable truths of God’s revelation.3 In
reality, however, the telling fact is that Catholic doctrine denies
essential, biblical doctrines by that which it adds on to biblical truths.
For example, while Catholic doctrine affirms the worship of the three
distinct Persons of the Trinity, it adds divine adoration for the Virgin
Mary by addressing her in prayer as "the All Holy One". The exact words of
the official statement are, "By asking Mary to pray for us, we acknowledge
ourselves to be poor sinners and we address ourselves to the ‘Mother of
Mercy,’ the All Holy One".4 The Catholic Church also demands that worship,
which according to Scripture is due exclusively to the one true God in
three persons, is also to be given to the
1 The anathemas or curses against Evangelicals as heretics still remain in
Roman Catholic law because the Council of Trent (1545 – 1563) has never
been revoked. Since the demise of the Holy Roman Empire, the Papacy has had
no military and civil power by which to enforce these anathemas as it had
during the 605 years of the Inquisition. Thus the Papacy has recently
adopted "ecumenism, "dialogue," and promoting "social justice" as ways and
means of drawing Evangelical Christians into its fold.
2 Vatican Council II Documents, "Reflections and Suggestions Concerning
Ecumenical Dialogue," Vol. I, Sect. II.
This crucial Vatican document states, "…ecumenical dialogue is not limited
to an academic or purely conceptual level, but striving for a more complete
communion between the Christian communities…it serves to transform modes of
thought and behavior and the daily life of those communities. [non-Catholic
churches] In this way, it aims at preparing the way for their unity of
faith in the bosom of a Church one and visible: thus ‘little by little’, as
the obstacles to perfect ecclesial communion are overcome, all Christians
will be gathered, in a common celebration of the Eucharist, into that unity
of the one and only Church which Christ bestowed on his Church from the
beginning. This unity, we believe, dwells in the Catholic Church as
something she can never lose…"
3 For example she holds to the existence of a self-existent and eternal
God, the Creator of the universe, of man, and of all things. She teaches
the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. She teaches Adam’s sin resulting in
the shared guilt and consequences of his sin. She accepts the doctrine of
man’s redemption by Jesus Christ, teaching that He became incarnate and
endured the death of the cross; that He arose from the dead, ascended to
heaven, and will return again.
4 Catechism of the Catholic Church, Liguori Publications, 1994 Paragraph
2677 Hereafter referred to as Catechism.
"Sacrament" or "Eucharist", the Communion element. Thus, the Church of Rome
officially declares,
5 Vatican Council II Documents, Eucharisticum Mysterium," Vol. I, Para 3
(Emphasis not in original.)
6 Ephesians 2:8, 9
7 Catechism Paragraph 1129
8 John 10:35
9 John 17:17
10 Proverbs 30:6
11 II Timothy 3:16-17
"There should be no doubt in anyone’s mind ‘that all the faithful ought to
show to this most holy sacrament the worship which is due to the true God,
as has always been the custom of the Catholic Church. Nor is it to be
adored any the less because it was instituted by Christ to be eaten’".5
These two official teachings of the Church of Rome show that the divine
worship due to God alone is being given to Mary and to their communion
element. In addition, the essential doctrine of man’s redemption by Jesus
Christ is totally different in Papal Rome from that of the Bible. The
Scripture declares that sinners, dead in trespasses and sins, are "by
grace" "saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: It is the gift of
God: Not of works, lest any man should boast".6 This Scripture shows that
God directly saves sinners by His grace through faith. However, the
Catholic Church insists on the necessity of her sacraments and consequently
states,
"The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant
are necessary for salvation. ‘Sacramental grace’ is the grace of the Holy
Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament".7
The sacraments, which are declared by the Catholic Church to be
indispensable, nullify the biblical doctrine of man’s redemption. With
these explicit examples of the Catholic Church’s negation of essential
biblical truths, the Papacy’s official doctrine and teaching on all the
major topics of biblical truth need to be carefully examined.
The Basis of Truth
The first topic to address is, "What is the basis of truth?" In other
words, what is the norm by which we can know truth? The absolute standard
set by the Lord Jesus Christ rests in the fact that "the scripture cannot
be broken".8 He who identified Himself to His disciples, "I am the way, the
truth and the life", also declared the truth of God’s Word by praying for
them, "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth".9 From these
Scriptures we understand that God’s Word not only contains the truth, but
is truth itself. The Holy Scripture is the source of the believer’s
standard of truth. Since Scripture alone is inspired, it alone is the
ultimate authority, and it alone is the final judge of all human tradition
and reasoning. Accordingly, the commandment of the Lord states, "Add thou
not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar".10
Thus, in His written Word, the absolute authority of the Lord God is
totally sufficient for all the believer’s needs. The Apostle Paul confirmed
this when he wrote, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is
profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished
unto all good works".11 The Lord Jesus rebuked the Pharisees because they
placed their human tradition on the same level as the written Word of God.
Thus, the Pharisees corrupted the people’s understanding by confusing them
in regards to God’s Word as the very
2
12 Mark 7:13
13 Catechism Paragraphs 80, 81
14 II Peter 1:20, 21
15 John 16:13 "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide
you into all truth".
16 John 16:15
17 Catechism Paragraph 82
18 Catechism Paragraph 891
basis of truth. Jesus declared to them, "[You are] making the word of God
of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered".12
In spite of this unmistakably clear standard of truth, the Catholic Church
declares her own standard of truth. She begins her reasoning with the
following words,
"Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together
and communicate one with the other" "And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its
entirety the Word of God, which has been entrusted to the apostles by
Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit".13
The fact is that no "tradition" transmits in its entirety the Word of God.
This task is solely that of the Holy Spirit. First, in an exclusive sense,
the Scriptures are the composition of the Holy Spirit; as stated by the
Apostle Peter, "holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy
Ghost".14 The Holy Spirit is fully fitted for this work because He is "the
Spirit of truth".15 He has perfect knowledge of the truth because He is
God, one with the Father and the Son. The Holy Spirit reveals the truth of
the written Word to believers. For this reason the Lord Christ Jesus said,
"He shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you".16 Thus, the Holy
Spirit perfectly transmits the Word of God in its proper fullness.
Having equated her "Sacred Tradition" with Sacred Scripture, and having
stated that her tradition transmits the Word of God in its entirety, the
Catholic Church reaches its conclusion with the following words,
"As a result the [Catholic] Church, to whom the transmission and
interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, ‘does not derive her certainty
about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture
and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of
devotion and reverence".17
This statement is a formal denial of the sufficiency of Scripture and a
repudiation of its unique authority. For a church, claiming to be
Christian, to attach as much importance to tradition as she does to
Scripture is to totally devalue Scripture. It is like a husband who
declares that he loves his wife and at the same time states that he also
loves equally the woman across the street. Such love would be adulterous;
so also are Papal Rome’s "equal sentiments of devotion and reverence". Such
a declaration is tantamount to a rejection of Scripture and unfaithfulness
to the God of Scripture.
Catholicism, however, does have a standard for truth that is taken to be
absolute. It is not the unqualified authority of God in His written Word;
rather, it is the authority of a man, the Pope of Rome. For Catholics, the
ultimate authority lies in the decisions and decrees of the reigning Pope.
This is seen in their official teaching which states,
"The Supreme Pontiff, in virtue of his office, possesses infallible
teaching authority when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the
faithful...he proclaims with a definitive act that a doctrine of faith or
morals is to be held as such".18
3
19 For example, Pope Honorius I (625-38) was posthumously condemned as a
heretic and excommunicated from the
Church by the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-681 A.D.) He was also condemned
as a heretic by Pope Leo II, as
well as by every other pope until the eleventh century. It was not until
1870 at Vatican Council I that the Catholic
Church for the first time declared that the Pope is infallible.
20 Ephesians 2:1, "and you… who were dead in trespasses and sins."
21 Ephesians 2:9
22 Catechism, Paragraph 2021
23 Romans 11:6
24 Catechism Paragraph 1129
25 Vatican Council II Documents, No. 64, "Gaudium et Spes," 1965, Vol. I,
Sect. 14
Thus, in practice, the Catholic Church’s basis for doctrine is her pope and
what he states to be truth. In other words, this is truth claimed by
decree. The absurdity of this claim is evident when we remember that
several popes were declared to be heretics and thus condemned by Church
councils.19
Salvation by Grace Alone Denied by Catholic Sacramental System
That salvation is by God’s grace alone must be clearly understood.
Unredeemed sinners, all of whom are "dead in trespasses and sins",20 can
only be saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone because
salvation is "the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast".21
It is God who graciously saves by His unmerited free gift. In total
contrast to this, salvation in the Catholic Church is said to come about by
"grace" that is merely a "help" with the intention that people will
respond. Thus, the Catholic Church officially states, "Grace is the help
God gives us to respond to our vocation of becoming his adopted sons. It
introduces us into the intimacy of the Trinitarian life".22 In this view,
human beings are presumed to be good enough to respond to the help that God
gives to them. According to the Catholic Church, grace is not a
manifestation of God’s sovereign action in salvation but merely a "help"
given to humans that they may respond, should they decide to believe. The
Catholic teaching contradicts the very concept of grace. As the Scripture
states, "and if by grace, then is it [salvation] no more of works:
otherwise grace is no more grace".23 God’s sovereign action is what is at
stake and not uncertain, human response.
The Catholic concept of "grace" denies God’s sovereign grace. Therefore,
the Papacy needed to construct a mechanism by which Catholics can profess
that they have received grace. The primary tools of their invention are
called the "Sacraments". Accordingly, the Catholic Church states,
"The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant
are necessary for salvation. ‘Sacramental grace’ is the grace of the Holy
Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament".24
This teaching is appalling. In the Bible, salvation is given to an
individual by the absolute power of God’s grace alone – because in God
alone is the power to deliver a man from being spiritually "dead in
trespasses and sins" to being spiritually alive in Christ. However, the
Catholic Church adamantly disagrees with the Bible on this primary issue,
for it officially claims, "man has only been wounded by sin".25 Thus, her
Catechism describes God’s grace as a "help" accessible through her
sacraments. These sacraments are in turn totally under the control of the
Catholic priesthood.
4
26 Ephesians 1:6
27 Acts 16:31
28 II Peter 1:1
29 Romans 10:17
30 Catechism Paragraph 168
31 Catechism Paragraph 169
32 Catechism Paragraph 181
33 The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, 7th Session, March, 1547
(Rockford, IL: Tan Publishers, Inc., 1978) This curse against those who
believe that Christ alone is the object of their saving faith has never
been lifted. For centuries, the horrendous tortures of the Papacy’s
Inquisition were used throughout Europe and Britain to wipe out all
believers whose faith was in Christ alone. By the end of the eighteenth
century, the Papacy no longer had the
We absolutely praise the Lord God that from Scripture we can be sure that
His grace is totally His free gift, "wherein he hath made us accepted in
the beloved".26 In salvation, we are accepted not in any institution, or by
partaking of any sacrament, but in the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ
alone.
Papal Substitute for Christ Alone as Object of Faith
The object of faith is clearly seen in Scripture as the person of Christ
Jesus Himself. Consequently, it is stated, "Believe on the Lord Jesus
Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house".27 This faith is God-given
faith, as declared by the Apostle Peter, "Simon Peter, a servant and an
apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith
with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ".28
This God-given faith comes by hearing the Word of God as is stated, "So
then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God".29 The topic
of faith is so clear in Scripture that one would doubt that it could be
twisted by any church. Nonetheless, the Catholic Church does manage to
completely change the concept of faith. Regarding faith, she doesn’t deal
directly with the individual, but focuses attention on herself, "the
Church", as the object of faith and commitment, and as the one that first
believes. Thus she teaches, "It is the Church that believes first, and so
bears, nourishes and sustains my faith".30 Then, very audaciously and
misleadingly, she declares, "faith comes through the Church because the
Church is our Mother". As a result she officially teaches, "Salvation comes
from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the
Church, she is our mother…"31 In the Catholic Church the result is that a
person believes in "Mother Church" and not on the Lord Jesus Christ. Her
official words stating this are the
"‘Believing’ is an ecclesial act. The Church’s faith precedes, engenders,
supports and nourishes our faith. The Church is the mother of all
believers. ‘No one can have God as Father who does not have the Church as
Mother’".32
Therefore, Roman Catholics are compelled to submit to "holy Mother Church"
and accept her teaching. Without biblical warrant, the Catholic Church
seeks to replace Jesus Christ as the object of saving faith with a
substitute; namely, faith in "Mother Church".
The effect of this change is the enslaving of individuals to the Roman
Catholic Church rather than the freedom obtained by faith in Jesus Christ
alone. To maintain the Catholic Church as the object of faith, the Papacy
curses all who believe on Christ by faith alone. The official words of
"Mother Church" are,
"If anyone says that by the sacraments of the New Law grace is not
conferred ex opere operato [from the work worked], but that faith alone in
the divine promise is sufficient to obtain grace, let him be anathema
[cursed]".33
5
military and civil power to enforce her sinister doctrine. But by the
mid-twentieth century, the Papacy’s new tools had been formed against those
whose faith is in Christ alone: Ecumenism, dialogue, and "social justice"
were formally unveiled at Vatican Council II. The method has changed; but
the goal has not.
34 Romans 6:10
35 I Peter 3:18
36 Hebrews 9:28
37 John 19:30
38 Catechism Paragraph 1367 (Emphasis not in original)
39 Hebrews 9:22
40 Catechism Paragraph 1368
41 Hebrews 1:3
42 Romans 3:28
43 Titus 3:5
Christ’s Sufficient Once and For All Sacrifice
The unique oneness of Christ’s sacrifice is the fact that it was one
offering—once made. The concept "once" is deemed so important that it is
asserted seven times by the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. The
perfection of Christ’s sacrifice is contrasted with the repeated daily
sacrifices of the Old Testament. The truth of the excellence of Christ’s
sacrifice is highlighted by the word "once". For example, the Apostle Paul
teaches, "for in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he
liveth, he liveth unto God".34 The Apostle Peter likewise declares, "For
Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he
might bring us to God".35 The same truth is taught five times in the book
of Hebrews with the conclusion, "So Christ was once offered to bear the
sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second
time without sin unto salvation".36 The majestic truth is found in the
Lord’s declaration from the cross, "It is finished".37
In total contrast, the Catholic Church declares that Christ’s sacrifice,
which was offered on the cross, is contained and offered in her Mass. Her
official words, which are in defiance of Scripture, are the following,
"In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ
who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is
contained and is offered in an unbloody manner".38 However, the Bible
teaches that "without shedding of blood is no remission".39
Quite unbelievably she reaches an even more outlandish conclusion. She
declares that the sacrifice of Christ is also a sacrifice of the Church
offering herself with Him. The official words are, "The Church, which is
the Body of Christ, participates in the offering of her Head. With him, she
herself is offered whole and entire".40 It is utterly blasphemous for a
church to teach its members to offer themselves with Christ’s sacrifice.
The doctrine of participating in Christ’s sacrifice is entirely perverse
and immoral. This proposition is totally false as it denies the repeated
statements of God’s truth in Scripture. The work of redemption is "by
Himself",41 "without the deeds of the law",42 "not by works of
righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved
us".43 To teach people such a proposition is a dreadful abomination before
the Lord God!
The Nature of God as The Only All Holy One
The Bible clearly teaches that God alone is infinite, eternal, and
unchangeable in His Being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and
truth. Most important is the fact that He is the All Holy One. His holiness
is the divine attribute that covers all attributes so that His
6
44 I Samuel 2:2
45 Revelation 15:4
46 Isaiah 6:3
47 Catechism Paragraph 2677
48 Catechism Paragraph 2030
49 Isaiah 42:8
50 Exodus 20:4-5
51 Deuteronomy 4:13, 15-16
52 Exodus 32:4-9
righteousness is holy, His truth is holy, and His justice is holy. He is
each of His attributes, and the overall attribute of holiness is that which
separates Him from all beings. His holiness is distinctive and matchless.
This is the reason why we need to be saved by Him, the All Holy God. Thus,
we read in Scripture, "there is none holy as the Lord".44 Again, the Word
of the Lord proclaims, "who shall not fear thee O Lord and glorify Thy name
for thou only art holy and all nations shall come and worship before
thee".45 The Lord God is utterly holy in the words of Scripture, "Holy,
Holy, Holy, is the Lord of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory".46
In addition to declaring the holiness of God, the official teaching of the
Catholic Church declares Mary to be "the All Holy One". The capital letters
are there in print, and there is no disclaimer or footnote to explain
differently what is said. The following is stated, "By asking Mary to pray
for us, we acknowledge ourselves to be poor sinners and we address
ourselves to the ‘Mother of Mercy,’ the All Holy One".47 Furthermore,
Catholic teaching also officially states, "From the Church he [the
Catholic] learns the example of holiness and recognizes its model and
source in the all-holy Virgin Mary…"48 This blasphemous teaching is an
attempted theft of the very essence of the divine glory reserved unto God
alone. It comes as a shock to many to see that in this very doctrine the
Papacy displays its total disregard for the Godhead. We know that the
Sovereign Lord God alone is the All Holy One and that He is protective of
His glory, opposing all that are hostile to it, "I am the Lord: that is my
name: and my glory will I not give to another".49
Idolatry
The Scriptures are absolutely clear in declaring that we are neither to
make a graven image nor show any veneration to such images, "Thou shalt not
make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything...Thou shalt
not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them".50 Then Scripture explains
how this is to be understood, "and he [God] declared unto you his covenant,
which he commanded you to perform, even Ten Commandments; and he wrote them
upon two tables of stone. Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for
ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake...Lest ye
corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any
figure...".51 Hence, there is to be no similitude (or likeness) of God made
by mankind. That which is forbidden in Scripture is the making of any
likeness of Father, Son, or Holy Spirit. The Catholic Church, however,
rationalizes that one can indeed practice idolatry. Paragraph 2132 of the
1994 Catechism states,
"The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first
commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, ‘the honor rendered to an image
passes to its prototype,’ and ‘whoever venerates an image venerates the
person portrayed in it.’"
The reason given is that one venerates the person portrayed by the image
and not the image itself. Yet, this is exactly what the Bible forbids and
why God’s second commandment had forbidden Aaron from making the golden
calf.52
7
53 Catechism Paragraph 2131
The second reason given by Papal Rome to justify the practice of idolatry,
cites the ruling of an 8th century council, which states the following,
"Basing itself on the mystery of the incarnate Word, the seventh ecumenical
council at Nicaea (787) justified against the iconoclasts the veneration of
icons - of Christ, but also of the Mother of God, the angels, and all the
saints. By becoming incarnate, the Son of God introduced a new ‘economy’ of
images."53
When the Seventh Ecumenical Council at Nicaea decided that the incarnation
of Jesus Christ introduced a new "economy" of images, the unstated logic of
their decision required them to maintain that God changed His mind
regarding the Second Commandment. Such reasoning is blasphemy. God does not
change His mind. Jesus Christ and the Apostles were equally forthright in
condemning idolatry, just as were the commandments of the Old Testament.
Nevertheless, the Catholic Church claims that a "tradition comes from the
Holy Spirit" which justifies the making of graven images and these are to
be publicly displayed. Thus in its Catechism, Paragraph 1161 states,
"Following the divinely inspired teaching of our holy Fathers" and the
tradition of the Catholic Church (for we know that this tradition comes
from the Holy Spirit who dwells in her) we rightly define with full
certainty and correctness that, like the figure of the precious and
life-giving cross, venerable and holy images of our Lord and God and
Savior, Jesus Christ, our inviolate Lady, the holy Mother of God, and the
venerated angels, all the saints and the just, whether painted or made of
mosaic or another suitable material, are to be exhibited in the holy
churches of God, on sacred vessels and vestments, walls and panels, in
houses and on streets".
This is the "Mother Church’s full license for idolatry⎯plain, simple, and
condemned by the Lord God.
The Holy Spirit is also forthrightly blasphemed in the claim that He
established tradition to justify the use of images. Rather, the Bible makes
abundantly clear that God hates idolatry and forbids a representation in
art of what is divine (Exodus. 20:4-6). Making images to represent God
corrupts those who use them (Deuteronomy 4:13, 15-16). Images teach lies
about God (Habakkuk. 2:18-20). God cannot be represented in art and all who
practice such idolatry are commanded to repent (Acts 17:29-30). The Holy
Spirit issues His warning in the New Testament as He did in the Old,
"Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen" (I John. 5:21). Among
the evil fruits of bringing idolatry that God hates into worship are the
many pagan superstitions and traditions of Roman Catholicism. But the worst
fruit of the idolatry that is rife in Roman Catholic worship under the
guise of being Christian is its false gospel.
The topic of idolatry is of utmost importance as many present day
Bible-believing churches attempt to justify pictures and videos of Christ.
They argue that both we, and those who cannot read, can come to a fuller
understanding of the person of Christ from these images. Yet, the Bible
clearly states that such images lie. Jesus Christ is the only one with two
distinct natures – both divine and human – in one body. Therefore, to
attempt to make any kind of an image of Jesus Christ, graven or two
dimensional or moving, still falls under the Second Commandment.
8
54 Hebrews 1:3
55 Colossians 2:9
56 Exodus 20:4-6; Deuteronomy 4:13, 15-16; Habakkuk 2:18-20; Acts 17:29-30
Thus, the Holy Spirit commands in both Old and New Testaments, "little
children, keep yourselves from idols" I John 5:21.
57 Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, Para 1367
58 Hebrews 9:25-26
59 Hebrews 7:26
60 Hebrews 9:22
No image can portray Christ’s divinity, for He "is the brightness of his
[God’s] glory and the express image of his person",54 "in whom dwelleth all
the fullness of the Godhead bodily".55
If we are to be biblical, we must avoid or reject any pictorial
representation or video showing the persons of Father, Son, or Holy Spirit.
The punishment for idolatry is severe, as both Old and New Testament make
clear.56 For any temptation to visualize Christ, the Father, or the Holy
Spirit, there must be repentance; for God is Holy, and the truth of the
Bible is sufficient to provide for all our knowledge of things divine.
Idolatry of the Mass
At the heart of Roman Catholicism is the Mass or Eucharist, described by
the Second Vatican Council as "the fount and apex of the whole Christian
life". Papal Rome claims that the Mass is a sacrifice and that the
sacrifice of Calvary and the Mass are the same, "one single sacrifice".
Thus she teaches,
"The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single
sacrifice: ‘The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the
ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner
of offering is different.’ ‘In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in
the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on
the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody
manner.’"57
The Holy Spirit’s teaching, however, is that Christ’s sacrifice was once
offered, in contrast to the daily offering of sacrifices of the Old
Testament, "nor yet that he should offer himself often...for then must he
often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the
end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of
himself".58 Divine perfection is seen in the fact that it was one
sacrifice, once offered.
We list several grievous departures of "the Eucharistic Sacrifice" from the
divine perfection of the Atonement as revealed in Scripture: Firstly, to
provide a re-enactment of the one offering, once offered, is to set out to
undermine the will and purpose of God. Secondly, for anyone to deem himself
fit to offer the Lord Jesus Christ in His perfect sacrifice is simply
arrogance of the highest order. Christ Jesus alone was qualified to offer
Himself. He alone had the unique qualifications as the Holy Spirit teaches,
"For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled,
separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens".59 Thirdly, the
Catholic Church’s claim is that Christ "is offered in an unbloody manner".
However Scripture equates offering and suffering. In a propitiatory
sacrifice, to offer and to suffer are the same thing. This truth is so
important that it is given as an absolute principle, "without shedding of
blood is no remission".60 Hence, in this context, to propose a bloodless
sacrifice is a contradiction in terms. A bloodless sacrifice is a senseless
inconsistency that can have no purpose other than to deceive.
9
61 Exodus 20:5-6
62 Luke 22:19
63 This is the dogma in the Catholic Church that is called
"transubstantiation." Thus, the official teaching is in the Catechism of
the Catholic Church. Para 1376 states, "The Council of Trent summarizes the
Catholic faith by declaring: "Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was
truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has
always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now
declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes
place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of
the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the
substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly
and properly called transubstantiation."
64 Ephesians 2:1
65 Ephesians 2:8, 9
Fourthly, the Lord’s Supper is not a sacrifice; it is a memorial. The bread
and wine are tokens symbolizing the body and blood of the once and for all
sacrifice of Calvary. We are to eat and drink them to remember Him and His
atonement with thanksgiving and praise until He returns.
Today there are in the Catholic Church convents of nuns devoted to
worshipping the Eucharist on a rotational system day and night. There are
devout Catholics who spend hours kneeling before the "blessed sacrament"
worshipping and praying to it and obtaining solace, they say, from being in
the "real presence" of Christ Jesus. The horrifying fact is that such
people, professing that they are worshipping Christ in a religious and holy
way, are literally practising gross idolatry. Worship of the sacrament
brings about the wrath of God as promised in His Word. Idolatry is
spiritual adultery. The Lord God looks upon those who practice idolatry as
haters of Himself, though they pretend to love Him. The Scripture plainly
states that He will visit the iniquity "of the fathers upon the children
unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing
mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments".61
In the sixteenth century, during the reign of Mary I, or "bloody Mary",
many of the martyrs who died in the fire in England chose to do so because
of just four words of Scripture, "in remembrance of me".62 Had they been
willing to set aside these words, or at least given them a "liberal
interpretation", they could have saved themselves. Because they trusted
Christ and upheld His Word they refused to do so. For them, the Word of God
was truth and life. In affirming these words, the martyrs were denying the
Roman Catholic Church doctrine that the communion elements of bread and
wine contain the actual physical body and blood of Christ, together with
His soul and divinity.63
Conclusion
As we have sought to demonstrate, the Roman Catholic Church most certainly
is not Christian. Rather, it is an apostate church. The Bible, God’s
written word is the inerrant and infallible authority against the apostasy
of the Catholic Church and against her false gospel. The Scriptures make
clear that by nature, we are all born "dead in trespasses and sins",64 and
in practice, we rebel against the All Holy God. Therefore, we justly fall
under the curse of the Law. Yet, the love of the heavenly Father, through
the Gospel of grace, rescues His own from His fiery wrath. By means of the
conviction of sin, placed on the human heart by the Holy Spirit, He by His
grace alone turns us to Himself in faith alone for the salvation that He
alone gives. This salvation is based on Christ’s death and resurrection for
His own. As a result we believe on Jesus Christ the Lord alone, "for by
grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the
gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast".65 Thus by the
10
66 Psalm
abundant grace given by Jesus Christ we are not only redeemed from the
empire of death, but we can live and reign with Him as we are sanctified
daily through His Word by the Holy Spirit and by constant fellowship with
Him. With Him also we shall forever live and reign, world without end.
Through Christ Jesus, grace reigns with sovereign freedom, power, and
bounty! "Blessed be his glorious name for ever: and let the whole earth be
filled with his glory; Amen, and Amen."66 ♦
Permission is given to copy and distribute this article.
Our MP3s are easily downloaded and our DVDs seen on Sermon Audio at:
//www.sermonaudio.com/go/212
Our website is: //www.bereanbeacon.org
See our playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin
Mary" with 119 videos at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715. "Are Catholics
Christians?" By Richard Bennett (former RC priest for 22 years,
www.BereanBeacon.org) The Catholic Church presupposes itself to be
Christian. Nothing could be farther from the truth; yet, the Catholic
Church has presented and promoted herself in that guise particularly since
the close of the Second Vatican Council in 1965. A primary, non-negotiable
goal of Vatican Council II was to lay the groundwork and to establish the
rules and parameters for a multifaceted, ecumenical outreach. Evangelical
Christians, now called "separated brethren", rather than "heretics",1 are
the primary target of Catholic ecumenism. The goal is to draw them into the
Roman Catholic fold.2 Thus, in the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church,
the word "Christian" occurs more than 100 times in these official
teachings. Buzzwords such as "dialogue", "ecumenism", and "social justice"
are being used under the guise of promoting true Christianity while
advancing the Roman Catholic agenda.
Assurances to Evangelicals Negated
Evangelicals are assured that Catholics who believe in the incarnation,
death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ are true Christians, even
though they misunderstand some of the "technicalities" regarding salvation.
Such reasoning is negated by the fact that Catholicism differs from
biblical faith—not only on minor details, but more importantly on what is
essential for one’s salvation.
The most dangerous aspect of Catholic Church doctrine is that it appears to
be based on the great, indispensable truths of God’s revelation.3 In
reality, however, the telling fact is that Catholic doctrine denies
essential, biblical doctrines by that which it adds on to biblical truths.
For example, while Catholic doctrine affirms the worship of the three
distinct Persons of the Trinity, it adds divine adoration for the Virgin
Mary by addressing her in prayer as "the All Holy One". The exact words of
the official statement are, "By asking Mary to pray for us, we acknowledge
ourselves to be poor sinners and we address ourselves to the ‘Mother of
Mercy,’ the All Holy One".4 The Catholic Church also demands that worship,
which according to Scripture is due exclusively to the one true God in
three persons, is also to be given to the
1 The anathemas or curses against Evangelicals as heretics still remain in
Roman Catholic law because the Council of Trent (1545 – 1563) has never
been revoked. Since the demise of the Holy Roman Empire, the Papacy has had
no military and civil power by which to enforce these anathemas as it had
during the 605 years of the Inquisition. Thus the Papacy has recently
adopted "ecumenism, "dialogue," and promoting "social justice" as ways and
means of drawing Evangelical Christians into its fold.
2 Vatican Council II Documents, "Reflections and Suggestions Concerning
Ecumenical Dialogue," Vol. I, Sect. II.
This crucial Vatican document states, "…ecumenical dialogue is not limited
to an academic or purely conceptual level, but striving for a more complete
communion between the Christian communities…it serves to transform modes of
thought and behavior and the daily life of those communities. [non-Catholic
churches] In this way, it aims at preparing the way for their unity of
faith in the bosom of a Church one and visible: thus ‘little by little’, as
the obstacles to perfect ecclesial communion are overcome, all Christians
will be gathered, in a common celebration of the Eucharist, into that unity
of the one and only Church which Christ bestowed on his Church from the
beginning. This unity, we believe, dwells in the Catholic Church as
something she can never lose…"
3 For example she holds to the existence of a self-existent and eternal
God, the Creator of the universe, of man, and of all things. She teaches
the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. She teaches Adam’s sin resulting in
the shared guilt and consequences of his sin. She accepts the doctrine of
man’s redemption by Jesus Christ, teaching that He became incarnate and
endured the death of the cross; that He arose from the dead, ascended to
heaven, and will return again.
4 Catechism of the Catholic Church, Liguori Publications, 1994 Paragraph
2677 Hereafter referred to as Catechism.
"Sacrament" or "Eucharist", the Communion element. Thus, the Church of Rome
officially declares,
5 Vatican Council II Documents, Eucharisticum Mysterium," Vol. I, Para 3
(Emphasis not in original.)
6 Ephesians 2:8, 9
7 Catechism Paragraph 1129
8 John 10:35
9 John 17:17
10 Proverbs 30:6
11 II Timothy 3:16-17
"There should be no doubt in anyone’s mind ‘that all the faithful ought to
show to this most holy sacrament the worship which is due to the true God,
as has always been the custom of the Catholic Church. Nor is it to be
adored any the less because it was instituted by Christ to be eaten’".5
These two official teachings of the Church of Rome show that the divine
worship due to God alone is being given to Mary and to their communion
element. In addition, the essential doctrine of man’s redemption by Jesus
Christ is totally different in Papal Rome from that of the Bible. The
Scripture declares that sinners, dead in trespasses and sins, are "by
grace" "saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: It is the gift of
God: Not of works, lest any man should boast".6 This Scripture shows that
God directly saves sinners by His grace through faith. However, the
Catholic Church insists on the necessity of her sacraments and consequently
states,
"The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant
are necessary for salvation. ‘Sacramental grace’ is the grace of the Holy
Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament".7
The sacraments, which are declared by the Catholic Church to be
indispensable, nullify the biblical doctrine of man’s redemption. With
these explicit examples of the Catholic Church’s negation of essential
biblical truths, the Papacy’s official doctrine and teaching on all the
major topics of biblical truth need to be carefully examined.
The Basis of Truth
The first topic to address is, "What is the basis of truth?" In other
words, what is the norm by which we can know truth? The absolute standard
set by the Lord Jesus Christ rests in the fact that "the scripture cannot
be broken".8 He who identified Himself to His disciples, "I am the way, the
truth and the life", also declared the truth of God’s Word by praying for
them, "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth".9 From these
Scriptures we understand that God’s Word not only contains the truth, but
is truth itself. The Holy Scripture is the source of the believer’s
standard of truth. Since Scripture alone is inspired, it alone is the
ultimate authority, and it alone is the final judge of all human tradition
and reasoning. Accordingly, the commandment of the Lord states, "Add thou
not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar".10
Thus, in His written Word, the absolute authority of the Lord God is
totally sufficient for all the believer’s needs. The Apostle Paul confirmed
this when he wrote, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is
profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished
unto all good works".11 The Lord Jesus rebuked the Pharisees because they
placed their human tradition on the same level as the written Word of God.
Thus, the Pharisees corrupted the people’s understanding by confusing them
in regards to God’s Word as the very
2
12 Mark 7:13
13 Catechism Paragraphs 80, 81
14 II Peter 1:20, 21
15 John 16:13 "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide
you into all truth".
16 John 16:15
17 Catechism Paragraph 82
18 Catechism Paragraph 891
basis of truth. Jesus declared to them, "[You are] making the word of God
of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered".12
In spite of this unmistakably clear standard of truth, the Catholic Church
declares her own standard of truth. She begins her reasoning with the
following words,
"Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together
and communicate one with the other" "And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its
entirety the Word of God, which has been entrusted to the apostles by
Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit".13
The fact is that no "tradition" transmits in its entirety the Word of God.
This task is solely that of the Holy Spirit. First, in an exclusive sense,
the Scriptures are the composition of the Holy Spirit; as stated by the
Apostle Peter, "holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy
Ghost".14 The Holy Spirit is fully fitted for this work because He is "the
Spirit of truth".15 He has perfect knowledge of the truth because He is
God, one with the Father and the Son. The Holy Spirit reveals the truth of
the written Word to believers. For this reason the Lord Christ Jesus said,
"He shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you".16 Thus, the Holy
Spirit perfectly transmits the Word of God in its proper fullness.
Having equated her "Sacred Tradition" with Sacred Scripture, and having
stated that her tradition transmits the Word of God in its entirety, the
Catholic Church reaches its conclusion with the following words,
"As a result the [Catholic] Church, to whom the transmission and
interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, ‘does not derive her certainty
about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture
and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of
devotion and reverence".17
This statement is a formal denial of the sufficiency of Scripture and a
repudiation of its unique authority. For a church, claiming to be
Christian, to attach as much importance to tradition as she does to
Scripture is to totally devalue Scripture. It is like a husband who
declares that he loves his wife and at the same time states that he also
loves equally the woman across the street. Such love would be adulterous;
so also are Papal Rome’s "equal sentiments of devotion and reverence". Such
a declaration is tantamount to a rejection of Scripture and unfaithfulness
to the God of Scripture.
Catholicism, however, does have a standard for truth that is taken to be
absolute. It is not the unqualified authority of God in His written Word;
rather, it is the authority of a man, the Pope of Rome. For Catholics, the
ultimate authority lies in the decisions and decrees of the reigning Pope.
This is seen in their official teaching which states,
"The Supreme Pontiff, in virtue of his office, possesses infallible
teaching authority when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the
faithful...he proclaims with a definitive act that a doctrine of faith or
morals is to be held as such".18
3
19 For example, Pope Honorius I (625-38) was posthumously condemned as a
heretic and excommunicated from the
Church by the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-681 A.D.) He was also condemned
as a heretic by Pope Leo II, as
well as by every other pope until the eleventh century. It was not until
1870 at Vatican Council I that the Catholic
Church for the first time declared that the Pope is infallible.
20 Ephesians 2:1, "and you… who were dead in trespasses and sins."
21 Ephesians 2:9
22 Catechism, Paragraph 2021
23 Romans 11:6
24 Catechism Paragraph 1129
25 Vatican Council II Documents, No. 64, "Gaudium et Spes," 1965, Vol. I,
Sect. 14
Thus, in practice, the Catholic Church’s basis for doctrine is her pope and
what he states to be truth. In other words, this is truth claimed by
decree. The absurdity of this claim is evident when we remember that
several popes were declared to be heretics and thus condemned by Church
councils.19
Salvation by Grace Alone Denied by Catholic Sacramental System
That salvation is by God’s grace alone must be clearly understood.
Unredeemed sinners, all of whom are "dead in trespasses and sins",20 can
only be saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone because
salvation is "the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast".21
It is God who graciously saves by His unmerited free gift. In total
contrast to this, salvation in the Catholic Church is said to come about by
"grace" that is merely a "help" with the intention that people will
respond. Thus, the Catholic Church officially states, "Grace is the help
God gives us to respond to our vocation of becoming his adopted sons. It
introduces us into the intimacy of the Trinitarian life".22 In this view,
human beings are presumed to be good enough to respond to the help that God
gives to them. According to the Catholic Church, grace is not a
manifestation of God’s sovereign action in salvation but merely a "help"
given to humans that they may respond, should they decide to believe. The
Catholic teaching contradicts the very concept of grace. As the Scripture
states, "and if by grace, then is it [salvation] no more of works:
otherwise grace is no more grace".23 God’s sovereign action is what is at
stake and not uncertain, human response.
The Catholic concept of "grace" denies God’s sovereign grace. Therefore,
the Papacy needed to construct a mechanism by which Catholics can profess
that they have received grace. The primary tools of their invention are
called the "Sacraments". Accordingly, the Catholic Church states,
"The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant
are necessary for salvation. ‘Sacramental grace’ is the grace of the Holy
Spirit, given by Christ and proper to each sacrament".24
This teaching is appalling. In the Bible, salvation is given to an
individual by the absolute power of God’s grace alone – because in God
alone is the power to deliver a man from being spiritually "dead in
trespasses and sins" to being spiritually alive in Christ. However, the
Catholic Church adamantly disagrees with the Bible on this primary issue,
for it officially claims, "man has only been wounded by sin".25 Thus, her
Catechism describes God’s grace as a "help" accessible through her
sacraments. These sacraments are in turn totally under the control of the
Catholic priesthood.
4
26 Ephesians 1:6
27 Acts 16:31
28 II Peter 1:1
29 Romans 10:17
30 Catechism Paragraph 168
31 Catechism Paragraph 169
32 Catechism Paragraph 181
33 The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, 7th Session, March, 1547
(Rockford, IL: Tan Publishers, Inc., 1978) This curse against those who
believe that Christ alone is the object of their saving faith has never
been lifted. For centuries, the horrendous tortures of the Papacy’s
Inquisition were used throughout Europe and Britain to wipe out all
believers whose faith was in Christ alone. By the end of the eighteenth
century, the Papacy no longer had the
We absolutely praise the Lord God that from Scripture we can be sure that
His grace is totally His free gift, "wherein he hath made us accepted in
the beloved".26 In salvation, we are accepted not in any institution, or by
partaking of any sacrament, but in the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ
alone.
Papal Substitute for Christ Alone as Object of Faith
The object of faith is clearly seen in Scripture as the person of Christ
Jesus Himself. Consequently, it is stated, "Believe on the Lord Jesus
Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house".27 This faith is God-given
faith, as declared by the Apostle Peter, "Simon Peter, a servant and an
apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith
with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ".28
This God-given faith comes by hearing the Word of God as is stated, "So
then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God".29 The topic
of faith is so clear in Scripture that one would doubt that it could be
twisted by any church. Nonetheless, the Catholic Church does manage to
completely change the concept of faith. Regarding faith, she doesn’t deal
directly with the individual, but focuses attention on herself, "the
Church", as the object of faith and commitment, and as the one that first
believes. Thus she teaches, "It is the Church that believes first, and so
bears, nourishes and sustains my faith".30 Then, very audaciously and
misleadingly, she declares, "faith comes through the Church because the
Church is our Mother". As a result she officially teaches, "Salvation comes
from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the
Church, she is our mother…"31 In the Catholic Church the result is that a
person believes in "Mother Church" and not on the Lord Jesus Christ. Her
official words stating this are the
"‘Believing’ is an ecclesial act. The Church’s faith precedes, engenders,
supports and nourishes our faith. The Church is the mother of all
believers. ‘No one can have God as Father who does not have the Church as
Mother’".32
Therefore, Roman Catholics are compelled to submit to "holy Mother Church"
and accept her teaching. Without biblical warrant, the Catholic Church
seeks to replace Jesus Christ as the object of saving faith with a
substitute; namely, faith in "Mother Church".
The effect of this change is the enslaving of individuals to the Roman
Catholic Church rather than the freedom obtained by faith in Jesus Christ
alone. To maintain the Catholic Church as the object of faith, the Papacy
curses all who believe on Christ by faith alone. The official words of
"Mother Church" are,
"If anyone says that by the sacraments of the New Law grace is not
conferred ex opere operato [from the work worked], but that faith alone in
the divine promise is sufficient to obtain grace, let him be anathema
[cursed]".33
5
military and civil power to enforce her sinister doctrine. But by the
mid-twentieth century, the Papacy’s new tools had been formed against those
whose faith is in Christ alone: Ecumenism, dialogue, and "social justice"
were formally unveiled at Vatican Council II. The method has changed; but
the goal has not.
34 Romans 6:10
35 I Peter 3:18
36 Hebrews 9:28
37 John 19:30
38 Catechism Paragraph 1367 (Emphasis not in original)
39 Hebrews 9:22
40 Catechism Paragraph 1368
41 Hebrews 1:3
42 Romans 3:28
43 Titus 3:5
Christ’s Sufficient Once and For All Sacrifice
The unique oneness of Christ’s sacrifice is the fact that it was one
offering—once made. The concept "once" is deemed so important that it is
asserted seven times by the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. The
perfection of Christ’s sacrifice is contrasted with the repeated daily
sacrifices of the Old Testament. The truth of the excellence of Christ’s
sacrifice is highlighted by the word "once". For example, the Apostle Paul
teaches, "for in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he
liveth, he liveth unto God".34 The Apostle Peter likewise declares, "For
Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he
might bring us to God".35 The same truth is taught five times in the book
of Hebrews with the conclusion, "So Christ was once offered to bear the
sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second
time without sin unto salvation".36 The majestic truth is found in the
Lord’s declaration from the cross, "It is finished".37
In total contrast, the Catholic Church declares that Christ’s sacrifice,
which was offered on the cross, is contained and offered in her Mass. Her
official words, which are in defiance of Scripture, are the following,
"In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ
who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is
contained and is offered in an unbloody manner".38 However, the Bible
teaches that "without shedding of blood is no remission".39
Quite unbelievably she reaches an even more outlandish conclusion. She
declares that the sacrifice of Christ is also a sacrifice of the Church
offering herself with Him. The official words are, "The Church, which is
the Body of Christ, participates in the offering of her Head. With him, she
herself is offered whole and entire".40 It is utterly blasphemous for a
church to teach its members to offer themselves with Christ’s sacrifice.
The doctrine of participating in Christ’s sacrifice is entirely perverse
and immoral. This proposition is totally false as it denies the repeated
statements of God’s truth in Scripture. The work of redemption is "by
Himself",41 "without the deeds of the law",42 "not by works of
righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved
us".43 To teach people such a proposition is a dreadful abomination before
the Lord God!
The Nature of God as The Only All Holy One
The Bible clearly teaches that God alone is infinite, eternal, and
unchangeable in His Being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and
truth. Most important is the fact that He is the All Holy One. His holiness
is the divine attribute that covers all attributes so that His
6
44 I Samuel 2:2
45 Revelation 15:4
46 Isaiah 6:3
47 Catechism Paragraph 2677
48 Catechism Paragraph 2030
49 Isaiah 42:8
50 Exodus 20:4-5
51 Deuteronomy 4:13, 15-16
52 Exodus 32:4-9
righteousness is holy, His truth is holy, and His justice is holy. He is
each of His attributes, and the overall attribute of holiness is that which
separates Him from all beings. His holiness is distinctive and matchless.
This is the reason why we need to be saved by Him, the All Holy God. Thus,
we read in Scripture, "there is none holy as the Lord".44 Again, the Word
of the Lord proclaims, "who shall not fear thee O Lord and glorify Thy name
for thou only art holy and all nations shall come and worship before
thee".45 The Lord God is utterly holy in the words of Scripture, "Holy,
Holy, Holy, is the Lord of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory".46
In addition to declaring the holiness of God, the official teaching of the
Catholic Church declares Mary to be "the All Holy One". The capital letters
are there in print, and there is no disclaimer or footnote to explain
differently what is said. The following is stated, "By asking Mary to pray
for us, we acknowledge ourselves to be poor sinners and we address
ourselves to the ‘Mother of Mercy,’ the All Holy One".47 Furthermore,
Catholic teaching also officially states, "From the Church he [the
Catholic] learns the example of holiness and recognizes its model and
source in the all-holy Virgin Mary…"48 This blasphemous teaching is an
attempted theft of the very essence of the divine glory reserved unto God
alone. It comes as a shock to many to see that in this very doctrine the
Papacy displays its total disregard for the Godhead. We know that the
Sovereign Lord God alone is the All Holy One and that He is protective of
His glory, opposing all that are hostile to it, "I am the Lord: that is my
name: and my glory will I not give to another".49
Idolatry
The Scriptures are absolutely clear in declaring that we are neither to
make a graven image nor show any veneration to such images, "Thou shalt not
make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything...Thou shalt
not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them".50 Then Scripture explains
how this is to be understood, "and he [God] declared unto you his covenant,
which he commanded you to perform, even Ten Commandments; and he wrote them
upon two tables of stone. Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for
ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake...Lest ye
corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any
figure...".51 Hence, there is to be no similitude (or likeness) of God made
by mankind. That which is forbidden in Scripture is the making of any
likeness of Father, Son, or Holy Spirit. The Catholic Church, however,
rationalizes that one can indeed practice idolatry. Paragraph 2132 of the
1994 Catechism states,
"The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first
commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, ‘the honor rendered to an image
passes to its prototype,’ and ‘whoever venerates an image venerates the
person portrayed in it.’"
The reason given is that one venerates the person portrayed by the image
and not the image itself. Yet, this is exactly what the Bible forbids and
why God’s second commandment had forbidden Aaron from making the golden
calf.52
7
53 Catechism Paragraph 2131
The second reason given by Papal Rome to justify the practice of idolatry,
cites the ruling of an 8th century council, which states the following,
"Basing itself on the mystery of the incarnate Word, the seventh ecumenical
council at Nicaea (787) justified against the iconoclasts the veneration of
icons - of Christ, but also of the Mother of God, the angels, and all the
saints. By becoming incarnate, the Son of God introduced a new ‘economy’ of
images."53
When the Seventh Ecumenical Council at Nicaea decided that the incarnation
of Jesus Christ introduced a new "economy" of images, the unstated logic of
their decision required them to maintain that God changed His mind
regarding the Second Commandment. Such reasoning is blasphemy. God does not
change His mind. Jesus Christ and the Apostles were equally forthright in
condemning idolatry, just as were the commandments of the Old Testament.
Nevertheless, the Catholic Church claims that a "tradition comes from the
Holy Spirit" which justifies the making of graven images and these are to
be publicly displayed. Thus in its Catechism, Paragraph 1161 states,
"Following the divinely inspired teaching of our holy Fathers" and the
tradition of the Catholic Church (for we know that this tradition comes
from the Holy Spirit who dwells in her) we rightly define with full
certainty and correctness that, like the figure of the precious and
life-giving cross, venerable and holy images of our Lord and God and
Savior, Jesus Christ, our inviolate Lady, the holy Mother of God, and the
venerated angels, all the saints and the just, whether painted or made of
mosaic or another suitable material, are to be exhibited in the holy
churches of God, on sacred vessels and vestments, walls and panels, in
houses and on streets".
This is the "Mother Church’s full license for idolatry⎯plain, simple, and
condemned by the Lord God.
The Holy Spirit is also forthrightly blasphemed in the claim that He
established tradition to justify the use of images. Rather, the Bible makes
abundantly clear that God hates idolatry and forbids a representation in
art of what is divine (Exodus. 20:4-6). Making images to represent God
corrupts those who use them (Deuteronomy 4:13, 15-16). Images teach lies
about God (Habakkuk. 2:18-20). God cannot be represented in art and all who
practice such idolatry are commanded to repent (Acts 17:29-30). The Holy
Spirit issues His warning in the New Testament as He did in the Old,
"Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen" (I John. 5:21). Among
the evil fruits of bringing idolatry that God hates into worship are the
many pagan superstitions and traditions of Roman Catholicism. But the worst
fruit of the idolatry that is rife in Roman Catholic worship under the
guise of being Christian is its false gospel.
The topic of idolatry is of utmost importance as many present day
Bible-believing churches attempt to justify pictures and videos of Christ.
They argue that both we, and those who cannot read, can come to a fuller
understanding of the person of Christ from these images. Yet, the Bible
clearly states that such images lie. Jesus Christ is the only one with two
distinct natures – both divine and human – in one body. Therefore, to
attempt to make any kind of an image of Jesus Christ, graven or two
dimensional or moving, still falls under the Second Commandment.
8
54 Hebrews 1:3
55 Colossians 2:9
56 Exodus 20:4-6; Deuteronomy 4:13, 15-16; Habakkuk 2:18-20; Acts 17:29-30
Thus, the Holy Spirit commands in both Old and New Testaments, "little
children, keep yourselves from idols" I John 5:21.
57 Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, Para 1367
58 Hebrews 9:25-26
59 Hebrews 7:26
60 Hebrews 9:22
No image can portray Christ’s divinity, for He "is the brightness of his
[God’s] glory and the express image of his person",54 "in whom dwelleth all
the fullness of the Godhead bodily".55
If we are to be biblical, we must avoid or reject any pictorial
representation or video showing the persons of Father, Son, or Holy Spirit.
The punishment for idolatry is severe, as both Old and New Testament make
clear.56 For any temptation to visualize Christ, the Father, or the Holy
Spirit, there must be repentance; for God is Holy, and the truth of the
Bible is sufficient to provide for all our knowledge of things divine.
Idolatry of the Mass
At the heart of Roman Catholicism is the Mass or Eucharist, described by
the Second Vatican Council as "the fount and apex of the whole Christian
life". Papal Rome claims that the Mass is a sacrifice and that the
sacrifice of Calvary and the Mass are the same, "one single sacrifice".
Thus she teaches,
"The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single
sacrifice: ‘The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the
ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner
of offering is different.’ ‘In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in
the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on
the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody
manner.’"57
The Holy Spirit’s teaching, however, is that Christ’s sacrifice was once
offered, in contrast to the daily offering of sacrifices of the Old
Testament, "nor yet that he should offer himself often...for then must he
often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the
end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of
himself".58 Divine perfection is seen in the fact that it was one
sacrifice, once offered.
We list several grievous departures of "the Eucharistic Sacrifice" from the
divine perfection of the Atonement as revealed in Scripture: Firstly, to
provide a re-enactment of the one offering, once offered, is to set out to
undermine the will and purpose of God. Secondly, for anyone to deem himself
fit to offer the Lord Jesus Christ in His perfect sacrifice is simply
arrogance of the highest order. Christ Jesus alone was qualified to offer
Himself. He alone had the unique qualifications as the Holy Spirit teaches,
"For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled,
separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens".59 Thirdly, the
Catholic Church’s claim is that Christ "is offered in an unbloody manner".
However Scripture equates offering and suffering. In a propitiatory
sacrifice, to offer and to suffer are the same thing. This truth is so
important that it is given as an absolute principle, "without shedding of
blood is no remission".60 Hence, in this context, to propose a bloodless
sacrifice is a contradiction in terms. A bloodless sacrifice is a senseless
inconsistency that can have no purpose other than to deceive.
9
61 Exodus 20:5-6
62 Luke 22:19
63 This is the dogma in the Catholic Church that is called
"transubstantiation." Thus, the official teaching is in the Catechism of
the Catholic Church. Para 1376 states, "The Council of Trent summarizes the
Catholic faith by declaring: "Because Christ our Redeemer said that it was
truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has
always been the conviction of the Church of God, and this holy Council now
declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes
place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of
the body of Christ our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the
substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly
and properly called transubstantiation."
64 Ephesians 2:1
65 Ephesians 2:8, 9
Fourthly, the Lord’s Supper is not a sacrifice; it is a memorial. The bread
and wine are tokens symbolizing the body and blood of the once and for all
sacrifice of Calvary. We are to eat and drink them to remember Him and His
atonement with thanksgiving and praise until He returns.
Today there are in the Catholic Church convents of nuns devoted to
worshipping the Eucharist on a rotational system day and night. There are
devout Catholics who spend hours kneeling before the "blessed sacrament"
worshipping and praying to it and obtaining solace, they say, from being in
the "real presence" of Christ Jesus. The horrifying fact is that such
people, professing that they are worshipping Christ in a religious and holy
way, are literally practising gross idolatry. Worship of the sacrament
brings about the wrath of God as promised in His Word. Idolatry is
spiritual adultery. The Lord God looks upon those who practice idolatry as
haters of Himself, though they pretend to love Him. The Scripture plainly
states that He will visit the iniquity "of the fathers upon the children
unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing
mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments".61
In the sixteenth century, during the reign of Mary I, or "bloody Mary",
many of the martyrs who died in the fire in England chose to do so because
of just four words of Scripture, "in remembrance of me".62 Had they been
willing to set aside these words, or at least given them a "liberal
interpretation", they could have saved themselves. Because they trusted
Christ and upheld His Word they refused to do so. For them, the Word of God
was truth and life. In affirming these words, the martyrs were denying the
Roman Catholic Church doctrine that the communion elements of bread and
wine contain the actual physical body and blood of Christ, together with
His soul and divinity.63
Conclusion
As we have sought to demonstrate, the Roman Catholic Church most certainly
is not Christian. Rather, it is an apostate church. The Bible, God’s
written word is the inerrant and infallible authority against the apostasy
of the Catholic Church and against her false gospel. The Scriptures make
clear that by nature, we are all born "dead in trespasses and sins",64 and
in practice, we rebel against the All Holy God. Therefore, we justly fall
under the curse of the Law. Yet, the love of the heavenly Father, through
the Gospel of grace, rescues His own from His fiery wrath. By means of the
conviction of sin, placed on the human heart by the Holy Spirit, He by His
grace alone turns us to Himself in faith alone for the salvation that He
alone gives. This salvation is based on Christ’s death and resurrection for
His own. As a result we believe on Jesus Christ the Lord alone, "for by
grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the
gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast".65 Thus by the
10
66 Psalm
abundant grace given by Jesus Christ we are not only redeemed from the
empire of death, but we can live and reign with Him as we are sanctified
daily through His Word by the Holy Spirit and by constant fellowship with
Him. With Him also we shall forever live and reign, world without end.
Through Christ Jesus, grace reigns with sovereign freedom, power, and
bounty! "Blessed be his glorious name for ever: and let the whole earth be
filled with his glory; Amen, and Amen."66 ♦
Permission is given to copy and distribute this article.
Our MP3s are easily downloaded and our DVDs seen on Sermon Audio at:
//www.sermonaudio.com/go/212
Our website is: //www.bereanbeacon.org
The Only True Church - Hear the following: "Is the Pope in the True
Church?" at //www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=820752920, "The
One True Church" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=81212170178, "Papacy's Claim
to have the Authority of the Apostle Peter, Roman Catholicism, Pope" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=121312161512, "Institutes of
the Christian Religion #42 The Ancient Form of Goverment Utterly Corrupted
by the Tyranny of the Papacy/Antichrist" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=21308121690 & see our
playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin Mary" at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715.
Just about everyone who has started a movement has declared themselves the
only true church on earth. In this they claim one must join their exclusive
group or organization to be saved and to be a Christian. Many believe there
has been a complete apostasy already, so there is need of a full
restoration. While God does have a true Church on earth, he has already
stated how one enters to be part of this Church. First lets go through the
many familiar and some not so familiar groups that claim to be the ONE TRUE
CHURCH. Then we will look at how one enters the true church.
Mormonism LDS- 13th LDS President Ezra Taft Benson, “This is not just
another Church. This is not just one of a family of Christian churches.
This is the Church and kingdom of God, the only true Church upon the face
of the earth...” (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p.164-165). This church is
the only true and living church on the face of the whole earth (D and C 1:30)
“There is no salvation outside the church of Jesus Christ of Latter -day
Saints (Mormon Doctrine, p.670)
“Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the Church of the Lamb
of God and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore who so belongeth
not to the church of the lamb of God belongeth to that great church; which
is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.” (The
Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 14:10)
on April 8, 1973, LDS Apostle Mark E. Petersen proclaimed that salvation
“comes only through the Church itself as the Lord established it...
Therefore it was made clearly manifest that salvation is in the Church, and
of the Church, and is obtained only through the Church.”
“The Roman Catholic, Greek, and Protestant church, is the great corrupt,
ecclesiastical power, represented by great Babylon....” (Orson Pratt,
Writings of an Apostle, “Divine Authenticity,” no.6, p.84).
the LDS church is, “the only true and living church upon the face of the
whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased ...” Brigham Young
(Mormonism's Second President)
“Our message is so imperative, when you stop to think that the salvation,
the eternal salvation of the world, rests upon the shoulders of this
Church. When all is said and done, if the world is going to be saved, we
have to do it “ (“Church Is Really Doing Well,” Church News (a bi-weekly
publication by the Mormon church), July 3 1999, 3)
Jehovah’s Witnesses- The Gospel of the Kingdom ceased to be proclaimed
shortly after the death of the apostles. It was not preached again until
after 1918.(WT, 12/1/1928, pp. 363-64)
We acknowledge as the visible organization of Jehovah on earth the
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, and recognize the Society as the
Channel or instrument through which Jehovah and Christ Jesus give
instruction and meat in due season to the household of faith. (Watchtower,
April 15, 1939 p. 125)
“ The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society the one and only channel which
the Lord has used in dispensing his truth continually since the beginning
of the harvest period?” (WT 4/1/1919, p. 6414)
“The world is full of Bibles…why then do the people not know which was to
go? Because, they do not also have the teaching or law of the mother, which
is light.”(WT 5/1/1957, p.274)
“Outside the true Christian congregation what alternative organization is
there? Only Satan’s organization…”(Watchtower 3/1/1979 p.24)
“Consider too, the fact that Jehovah's organization alone in all the earth
is directed by God's holy spirit or active force.” (Watchtower, July 1,
1973, page 402)
Iglesia ni Cristo- “the complete disappearance of the first-century Church
of Christ and the emergence of the Catholic Church” (Pasugo, July-Aug.
1979, p. 8).
Thus, outside the Church of Christ no one can be considered a true
believer.'' (PASUGO, September/October 1981, p.9)
“Each member ... should submit himself to the Administration of the Church
in order to be saved.”(PASUGO, January 1976, p. 9)
''People who embraced the true church will be saved not because of the good
deeds they have done, but through God's merciful act of commissioning
messengers entrusted with words of reconciliation.'' (PASUGO
September/October 1986, p. 20)
International Church of Christ - “There is one church! There is one God.
There is one kingdom of God and this is it! (The Great Commission, audio
tape, Weger/Rock, Hodge/Hamann/Fulcher/Fields)
“you are in the only family that exists on the face of the earth.”( Phil
Lamb, We Are Family, audio tape 1990 West Coast Conf.)
“We're the last hope the world has. Nobody else is going to do what we're
doing. Nobody else has the right message. Nobody else has the right
commitment.”( Gordon Ferguson, Radical Men, Radical Times Hosea Radical
Love of God, Manila World Leadership Conf., Aug. 1994 )
“your salvation is hanging in the balance. .... When you walk away from the
movement of God, there is no where to walk. Walking out of the light into
the darkness. There is nobody else There is nobody else in this country
that That has the true gospel -- that is, trying to make disciples of
Jesus. There is nobody else in this entire world. This is the movement of
God! There is no place to go.” (Nick Young. Tulsa Reconstruction meeting,
August, 1992, audio one, side two)
“When you preached who is really saved: that you gotta have faith, you
gotta repent, you gotta become a true disciple of Jesus, and then you gotta
be water immersed for the forgiveness of sins received through the Holy
Spirit, that excludes all other denominations…everybody else out there.”(
Kip McKean. “Preach the Word.” Johannesburg World Missions Leadership
Conference. Aug. 1995, audiotape #10091, side 2)
True Jesus Church- On 5. on the web they emphatically state “The True Jesus
Church is the true church restored by God through the Holy Spirit of the
latter rain. She is the revival of the apostolic church in the end times.”
on the web “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the
Father, but by Me” (John 14:6). Therefore, one can receive eternal life
only through the true church.”
The Philadelphia church- Mr. Flurry “The “household” is God's Family or
true church. It's the family that God rules. This is God's inner
circle--His very elect. One servant, one leader or one man is made ruler
over God's church. Only this church (The PCG) gives meat in due season.
Only this church is doing God's work!” (The Philadelphia Trumpet, p.1 May
1995)
“Some in the world try to label the PCG a cult. Actually, we are God's only
true representative on this earth!...”( The Philadelphia Trumpet, p. 19
March, 1994)
“...that truth is in only one church today, God's church. Only God's
Philadelphia Church has retained God's Law in this end time” (The
Philadelphia Trumpet , p.5 March 1994).
Roman Catholic Church-”But by divine institution it is the exclusive task
of these pastors alone, the successors of Peter and the other Apostles, to
teach the faithful authentically, that is with the authority of Christ
....” (Vatican Council II Vol. 2, p. 430, 1984)
“If anyone says that in the Roman Church, which is the mother and mistress
of all churches, there is not the true doctrine concerning the sacrament of
baptism, let him be anathema.” (The Canons And Decrees Of The Council Of
Trent, p. 53 -- Seventh Session, Sacrament Of Baptism, Canon 3)
“This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a
special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even
when he does not speak ex cathedra in such wise, indeed, that his supreme
teaching authority be acknowledged with respect, and that one sincerely
adhere to decisions made by him, conformably with his manifest mind and
intention ....” (Vatican Council II ,Vol. 1, p. 379)
The Second Vatican Council’s Decree on Ecumenism explains: “For it is
through Christ’s Catholic Church ALONE, which is the universal help toward
salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained.”
Pope Boniface VIII declared: “There is one holy Catholic and apostolic
church, outside of which there Is NO SALVATION ... it is altogether
NECESSARY FOR SALVATION for every creature to be subject to the Roman
Pontiff.' (“infallible papal bull, Unam Sanctam) Vatican II declared: ...
this holy Council teaches ... that the church .. Is NECESSARY FOR
SALVATION.” (VATICAN COUNCIL II, Costello Publishing, Austin Flannery,
O.P., General Editor, Vol 1, pp. 364-365)
All Christians will be gathered in a common celebration of the Eucharist,
into the unity of the one and only Church, ... The unity, we believe
subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose. (Vatican
II, Decree on Ecumenism, chap. 1, 4, p. 416).
The local Church (Witness Lee)- When we were in the denominations, we were
blind. I do not believe that any dear Christians who have really received
sight from the Lord could still remain in the denominations. Everyone who
sees must leave the fold and enter the pasture, under the sunshine, in the
fresh air, in liberty. Where are you now? Are you in the fold, or are you
now in the pasture? Allow me to say this: if anyone is still in the fold,
he is blind. Of course, a blind person requires the fold to keep him. But
when he receives his sight, he will swiftly leave the fold for the pasture,
for the sunshine, for the fresh air.” (Witness Lee, Christ Versus Religion
LSM, 197,1 p.109-110)
The only way to follow the Lord absolutely is to go the way of the local
church. (Witness Lee, The Practical Expression...p.94)
If you leave the church (the Local Church), you miss the mark of the Lord's
testimony. You must be in the testimony of Jesus. Only the golden
lampstands, the local churches, are the testimony of Jesus....if you are
not in the local churches you are not the testimony of Jesus.”( Witness
Lee, The Stream magazine Nov. 1976, p.7)
House of Yahweh-”With all the Churches and Religious Organizations in these
Last Days preaching what they call Salvation, why would Yahweh need to
establish another organization in order to get his way--the True Way of
Salvation--taught?
“The One Body of Messiah IS The House of Yahweh! “...IF we 'separate' from
the One Body of Messiah: The House of Yahweh, then we succumb to Satan,
then at that very moment we become worshipers of Satan...of if one LEAVES
The Body - The only Prophesied, Established Work that Yahweh Himself has
chosen, then that one does NOT partake, or is NO LONGER a partaker, with
the rest of The body of Messiah - The House of Yahweh” (What Yahweh's
Feasts Mean to You, pp. 78, 87).
“ The churches in the world today do not even pretend to keep Yahweh’s
Laws. How could they pretend such a thing anyway, they all blatantly rebel
against every one of them.... It should be very obvious why Yahweh had to
establish His House in these Last Days--the Christian Churches are not The
House of Yahweh. They do not stand in Yahweh’s counsel. They are not the
Pillar and Ground of the Truth. They do not teach Yahweh’s Laws, therefore,
they do not turn the people away from sin--breaking Yahweh’s Laws.”
“I urge you to obtain the books … and start learning the true way to
Salvation. This way is not taught in the world by any organization, other
than the one established by Yahweh--The House of Yahweh.”
Hawaii fellowship of the Universal World Church “a voice thundered and
uttered these words “This is my daughter in whom I am well pleased. As
Jesus, my son, paid the price through his faithfulness upon the cross.. my
anointed daughter, Miss Velma, has paid the price through her faithfulness
at the golden altar. Therefore, all who will believe in her, will receive
my gift of eternal youth which is new revelation Mamre.” (The mighty
Miracle of the new Revelation of Mamre p.49-50) The new Revelation of Mamre
is the greatest gift ever given to a people by almighty God. “(The mighty
Miracle of the new Revelation of Mamre p.7)
“Miss Velma has paid the price! She has become the sacrificial offering
required by God that all of mankind may reap one of god's greatest rewards,
new revelation Mamre”( ibid.p.51)
7th day Adventists-”I saw that God has honest children among the nominal
Adventists and the fallen churches, and before the plagues shall be poured
out, MINISTERS AND PEOPLE WILL BE CALLED OUT FROM THESE CHURCHES and will
gladly receive the truth....But the light will shine, and ALL WHO ARE
HONEST WILL LEAVE THE FALLEN CHURCHES, and take their stand with the
remnant” (Early Writings, p. 261 )
We can see the common thread of these churches. They are separatists and
deny anyone else can have the right message. That one must come to their
CHURCH to be saved. That is the common deviation from Scripture and what
makes them a cult. 1 Jn.2:19 “they went out from us but they were not of
us, if they had been of us , they would have continued with us, but they
went out that they might be made known that none of them were of us.” This
was already occurring in the early church.
Now that we have read through just a few churches that claim exclusivity to
being the only representatives of Christ and God on earth. We need to go to
the Bible to see what it states on this matter. It is possible that one of
these groups that claim this can be right. But it is impossible for all of
them to be right since they all claim exclusivity. Who would know? Jesus
who is the head of the Church would know, and the Apostles he appointed to
write down his teachings are the ones we need to go to, to find the truth.
What is the Church?
The first time we find the word Church is in Mt.16:18 where Jesus said he
will build his church upon the revelation the Father gave Peter when he
openly confessed that Christ is “ the Son of the living God.” “Upon this
rock I will build my church.” So this must be the Churches confession of
faith, if not, then it is not the Church. What this meant in the Judaic
culture is that Christ is equal to God, having the same nature as his
Father.
The Scripture is clear only God is to be worshipped Ex.34:14: “For thou
shall worship no other God for the Lord (Yahweh), whose name is jealous, is
a jealous God.” The Church worships God and also worships Christ. The
Father in Heb.1:6 tells all the angels to worship the Son. Both the Father
and the Son are worshipped in heaven (Rev.4-5) and on earth. The Bible
teaches that Jesus is not only worshipped, but also called God by Thomas in
Jn.20:28 “My Lord, my God.” (Greek- The Lord of me, the God of me). We
find the wise men worshipped Jesus as a child. Mt.2:11.The leper worshipped
Jesus Mt.8. The ruler bowed and worshipped Mt.9:18 .The believer who was
blind worshipped him Jn.9:38. The women worshipped him Mt. 15:25, Mary
Magdalene worshipped him Mt.28:9, the disciples worshipped him
Mt.28:17.Jesus was worshipped just as the Father was worshipped.
It is called the Church of God which he had purchased with his own blood
(Acts 20:28). After Christ raised from the dead and ascended he sent the
Holy Spirit to birth a new entity, the church. The Greek word is ekklesia
(which is used 114 times in the New Testament) which means a called out
assembly (Ek = out of, Kaleo= to call). It is never used of a building or
of the kingdom of God. The Church is not the kingdom, but included in it.
The Church is a invisible living spiritual organism, composed of all the
believers world wide, from the time of its inception on Pentecost, until
the taking away of the Church at the rapture. Its origin is found in God as
the Holy Spirit gave it its birth in Acts 2:1-4 with the disciples and the
Jews at Pentecost in v.33. And we become part of this same Church today
the same way they did, by spirit baptism, being born again of the Spirit.
No one joins the Church unless they are first joined to Christ. This is why
Jesus said you must be born again, (by the Spirit Jn.3:5) not join the
Church! The Church began in Jerusalem, not Rome. Any Church that does not
trace its start to Jerusalem on Pentecost is not His church. Those who
claim the Church needed to be restored from an apostasy are not part of the
original Church. Jesus said the gates of hell would not prevail against
the Church, she would never be overcome, no matter how many were killed, it
would never result in a complete apostasy. So any church claiming theirs
as a restoration can't be traced back to the original.
Jesus told Peter: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will
build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.” (Matt.
16:18). Meaning it would not remove it nor hinder it's growth, work or
people. If his Church had apostatized then the gates of hell would have
prevailed against it, which makes Christ a liar, that is uncomfortable even
for the cult's to say. Christ will not abandon his bride, he said he would
always be with. How could Christ be with his Church always if his Church
ceased to exist for over 1800 years? The Church is already made and
continues to grow through history. No devil or man can stop or hinder it
because Jesus is the architect, not man. While it is valid to claim that
there needs to be repentance or reformation throughout the church's
history, to get back to the bible when we drift. To restore a church from
apostasy has quite a different meaning.
The true Church is built upon what Peter said Christ is- The Son of the
living God- the eternal one. We can only have this by revelation the same
way Peter did, from heaven. It is not man revealing this truth but God
himself.
Christ teaches In Matthew 28:20 he said, “I am with you always even until
the end of the world.” And in John 14:16, 18 he said, “And I will pray to
the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you forever.
. . . I will not leave you desolate.” Christ promised that nothing would
prevail against his Church, that he would be with it always, that the Holy
Spirit, the Comforter, the third person of the Holy Trinity would be with
her always. Christ will not abandon his bride. How could Christ be with
his Church always if his Church ceased to exist for 1800 years?
We are the Church
We (the people) are the Church, which is likened to the temple 1 Pet. 2:5
“you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy
priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through
Jesus Christ.” We are bricks cemented together our spiritual sacrifice is
ourselves, our lives. As Rom.12:2 tells to present ourselves as living
sacrifices. We no longer sacrifice animals for a sin offering but present
ourselves, our lives to God continually each day to be used by Him.
1 Cor.3:16 teaches that each of us as individuals are the temple of God
because “the Spirit of God dwells in you.” You are not Christ's possession
or part of his Church unless you have the proof by the indwelling of the
Holy Spirit. (by the way this does not mean one must speak in tongues or
have another spiritual manifestation).
We are called Col. 1:24: “His body, which is the church” 2 Cor. 6:16 that
“we are the temple of the living God.” As God has said: “I will dwell in
them and walk among them. I will be their God, and they shall be My people.”
2 Cor.3:7 The church will be God's dwelling place. together we are the
temple (the church) the dwelling of God. Christ “In You” is the hope of
glory.
Eph. 2:20-22: “Having been built on the foundation of the apostles and
prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone, in whom the
whole building, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the
Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God
in the Spirit.” Jesus is the cornerstone and the apostles the foundation
stones. Paul explains further in Eph. 4:15-16: “but, speaking the truth in
love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head-- Christ-- from
whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies,
according to the effective working by which every part does its share,
causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.” The Church
is a living temple made up of bricks whom are the people. We are all
interdependent on one another. Just as a house is not made with one brick
but all are cemented together.
Each brick has a different gifting and talents and all are to be used so
that the body can be healthy. Just as Paul's example of the outside of the
body we are all different and the least is to be honored as much as the
greatest. Certainly the pancreas adrenal glands on the inside of the body
if they were not functioning would affect the rest of its health.
Heb 3:1-6: “For every house is built by someone, but He who built all
things is God. And Moses indeed was faithful in all His house as a servant,
for a testimony of those things which would be spoken afterward, but Christ
as a Son over His own house, whose house we are if we hold fast the
confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm to the end.”
How Does one Join the Church?
1 Cor. 12:27: “Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually.”
Notice collectively and individually. This means one does not have to
belong to a certain denomination or group but to Christ.
No one is told to join the Church by the apostles because it is an
automatic placing of one in the body of which Christ is the head. 2
Cor.5:17 “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old
things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” We are put
in Christ to become a new creature, not in a Church. Becoming part of a
Church is the natural outcome of the new birth.
Jn.1:12-13 “ But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become
the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. Which were born,
not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of
God.” To be born of God is to have the Holy Spirit regenerate the dead
spirit in man back to a relationship with God. This comes through Christ
alone, no Church or minister can give you this.
1 Cor.12:12-13 “For as the body is one and has many members, but all the
members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. For
by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-- whether Jews or Greeks,
whether slaves or free-- and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.”
This is how one enters the Church by the Spirit who comes inside us and
unites us with the rest of the body which is invisible and visible. Paul
writes in Rom.3:24: “Being justified freely by his grace through the
redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” This is one of Paul's favorite
technical terms. Paul points to our spiritual life coming from being
connected to the Son. It is Christ that uses examples to show us that He is
the gate, the door, the way. We enter the Church (become part of the
church) by a person and his work for us. As we come to Christ He puts each
one in his spiritual body the Church. You don’t join a church but are born
into a family that is the Church. And it is not limited to a local body but
a worldwide family of faith.
When Paul was persecuting the church, Jesus said he was persecuting him,
because he was the owner of it, we are his body and his Spirit indwells
those who he killed. By killing Christians he was fighting against Christ
himself. The Church is Christ's invisible body on earth. The Church is
called “the Church of God” Eph.5:23-24: “also Christ is head of the
church; and He is the Savior of the body.” 24... “the Church is subject to
Christ.” The Church is ruled by God, just as our body takes instructions
from its head. Col.1:18: “And He is the head of the body, the church, who
is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may
have the preeminence.” If we want to obey the truth we receive our
sustenance and instructions from Christ alone, collectively and
individually!
Jesus referred to those who were part of his body/ Church as “my sheep”. In
John 10:16, Jesus spoke of other sheep which were not of this fold, them
also I must bring and they will hear my voice; and there will be one flock
and one shepherd. What he meant is that the Gentiles outside the nation of
Israel were to be grafted into the covenant and have him as their shepherd.
You are the branches “I am the vine.” All these relate to our connection to
the Son who brings us to the Father, and is the source of our eternal life.
We cannot produce fruit apart from him Jn.17. Mark 6:34 “So He began to
teach them many things.” Listening to Christ is the first step to having
him be your shepherd, you then become a disciple by following his
teachings. The leaders or shepherds are to train the sheep to hear the
chief shepherds voice.
The word “Church of Christ” is not singular but plural in the Scriptures,
which is a problem for those that call themselves the exclusive Church of
Christ.1 Cor.1:2, 1 Cor.10:32, also Rom.16:16 calls them the Churches of
Christ. Rev.1:20 says Christ holds the seven golden lamp stand's, the seven
stars and the messengers (angels) of the seven churches in his hand showing
his control. This becomes a problem for numerous groups that claim the name
“Church of Christ”, since it is plural not single. Likewise for the
Jehovah’s Witnesses, since they are Jehovah’s “organization” and not a
Church nor Christ’s. Not because of name only, but because they do not
look to Christ as the head. Actually if one asks the question to these
groups who is the head of your Church? You can various answers from a
prophet, apostle, a revelator, to a Pope. Even those who claim Christ can
have a different Jesus from the Scriptures. (2 Cor.11:4) So we must examine
who Jesus is to them and their relationship to him.
Rev 2:23 “and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the
minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your
works.” Only God is able to search the heart and give rewards.
The Church's Purpose
The true Church teaches the bible alone, and promotes evangelism to fulfill
the commission Christ gave in Mt.28:18-19. Our purpose Eph. 3:9-10: “...
to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God,
who created all things; that through the Church the manifold wisdom of God
might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly
places.” This is done by teaching the Scriptures equipping the body for our
growth first then for the work of ministry Eph.4. So the message can go out
to there communities. We are to gather to be taught, equipped for ministry
so we can evangelize to bring others to the Lord. The church is a spiritual
hospital for sinners so they can be healed from sin. The church is not a
building to meet in to come to the Church, instead we should be going out
being the church. We have a mission. To make disciples and grow in their
relationship with God. We have them join in the body, whether its our
particular local body or another that is part of the church universal.
Everyone needs to be involved in a local body of believers, an assembly to
help bring health to themselves and the body.
Different churches have different focuses and different ways of doing
ministry. Within the main framework of evangelism there is other
ministries, this does not mean any one way is the only way as a long as it
is all biblical. Each church may have a specific way to minister to its own
communities needs and essentially have different focuses. It is from this
variety God is able to meet the needs of individuals and their
personalities.
The One TRUE Church
The true Church holds to the core beliefs of Christianity without
subtracting or adding to them. Christ is the eternal God come in the flesh,
there is one God and 3 distinct identities (persons) who exist
simultaneously as the One God. The virgin conception, the sinfulness of man
and the need of a savior, the new birth, the Gospel which is the death
burial and physical resurrection, the 2nd coming, baptism, eternal mediator
and priesthood of Christ, the priesthood of all believers, the
infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture, judgment and rewards to the
believers. These are the essentials that are clarified in the Scriptures.
If the Church one attends does not hold to these essential beliefs, they
are not Christ's Church no matter what name they have on their outside or
on paper. This is not my opinion, but the Bibles explanation what the
apostles taught through the Gospels, the book of Acts, and in the Epistles.
In conclusion there is one true Church, but it is not found in a certain
denomination or group by itself. Those who claim you must join their group
or Church to be right with God, only prove they do not understand what the
word Church or body of Christ means. It is not exclusive but inclusive, as
it is found in the heart of all those who have accepted the true Jesus, and
have come to God the way He has provided (through His son on the cross),
and hold to the essentials of the faith. Whether one is Lutheran, Anglican,
Baptist, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Charismatic, or Pentecostal, etc. The
Church transcends denominational barriers, it exists within denominations,
as well as outside of them. This is the Universal Church that has
continued from the beginning of Pentecost. While denominations may have
differences on peripheral issues, they do hold to the core beliefs that
make them all part of the body of Christ, the Church.
Two items that come in handy in knowing about when Romanists argue that
anything said against the Roman "church" is not the truth is to tell them
about the following two items: 1. The following website is by self
proclaimed Roman Catholics following the so-called "true church" (in other
words their Roman church is their true savior not the Biblical Jesus
Christ) at //www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/. These Romanists destroy
the new Romanists since the invention of Vatican 2 in 1965. They present
great information proving modern Romanism & their popes (they call them
anti-popes) to be a false & apostate religion. It doesn't get much better
than this when one group of apostate Romanists attack another brand of
apostate Romanists in order to prove to the world they are false! 2. Our
video "The Homosexual Pope, Priests, Universalists, Evolutionists &
Disunited Roman Catholic Apologists" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hThonwrX6QU&list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715 proves
from Roman Catholic sources themselves that one of their popes was a
practicing homosexual, that almost 50% of Roman Catholic priests are
homosexuals (for more on this see our video "FORMER ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST
SAYS CHURCH OF ROME HAS A FALSE GOSPEL & WIDESPREAD HOMOSEXUALITY" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y4C-nBQ3mE), that the Roman church buys
the theory of evolution which denies the first eleven chapters of Genesis
in the Bible, that Pope John Paul II kissed the Muslim Qur'an & said Islam
has the same god as Roman Catholics have (see the videos "Top Ten Reasons
Muhammad Is Not a Prophet" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO8sZ1JyP1A,
"Ten MORE Reasons Muhammad Is Not a Prophet" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4p7HuuhF8k, "50 Reasons Muhammad Was Not a
Prophet (in Under Five Minutes)" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Q3f15NXrLI, "David Wood: Five Reasons the
Quran Is Not the Word of God" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvlzlBov9zc,
"Who Killed Muhammad?" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6st_tFj6ouM,
"Why Did Muhammad Wear Women's Clothing?" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-50CraaniT0; also see
www.AnsweringMuslims.com & www.MuslimHope.com) & how Roman Catholic
apologists are at each others' throats because of the vast differences
within Romanism itself. Besides all that see the following websites for
detailed information on Romanism & how it is a counterfeit religion at
//www.BereanBeacon.org, //www.CWRC-RZ.org & //www.mtc.org/.
Remember Titus 1:9-16,
"9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be
able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.
10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they
of the circumcision:
11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things
which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.
12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, the Cretians are
alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be
sound in the faith;
14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn
from the truth.
15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and
unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being
abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate."
//www.BibleQuery.org //www.historycart.com/
//www.muslimhope.com/
John 14:6
Hear "Why You Can Believe The Bible" by Voddie Baucham at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=91314616480 & Dr. James White
concerning "Can I Trust My Bible?" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?seriesOnly=true&currSection=sermonstopic&sourceid=immanuelbc&keyword=Can+I+Trust+My+Bible%3F&keyworddesc=Can+I+Trust+My+Bible%3F which
includes "Textual Criticism: Reliability, Answering Critics, Bible Versions
& Sufficiency of Scripture."
How Do We Know the Bible is True? Is it Really the Word of God? Many
critics of Christianity attack the Bible’s truthfulness. Many don’t
believe it because they say it was written by man. Is the Bible really God
speaking to man? Is the Bible of human origin or a direct revelation from
God? The Bible The word Bible is from the root word “biblios” which is
Greek for “little books.“ The Bible contains 66 books and was written by
40 authors. The books you see in most Bibles have been tried and tested
and were generally accepted by the early church. For centuries the Bible
was not available to the general public due to their being only hand-copied
ones available. The Bible has been banned from many nations, it has been
burned by others, it has been declared out of date by moderns, but it has
brought salvation to untold millions. It is the unbridled truth and the
unchangeable Word of God that changes those who read it. When people read
it, it reads them too! It comforts the afflicted and afflicts the
comfortable. What follows is conclusive evidence that we can believe that
the Bible is God speaking to us and not just the words of men. Thus Says
the Lord or Thus Says Man?
If the Bible were indeed a work of man, then we would expect some of the
words to say, “thus says the prophet Jeremiah” or “thus says Peter an
Apostle of God” but it doesn’t. From what I could count, “Thus says the
Lord” is recorded 418 times. If it were of human origin, then we would
read somewhere that the Bible or the message came from a certain author but
we never see that anywhere. On the contrary, we read over 1,000 times
where “Jesus said” and “Thus says the Lord” were written down. In fact,
even the Book of Revelation is not called John’s Book of Revelation at
all. In Revelation 1:1-2 we see where the words of this book came from:
“The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants
what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his
servant John.” So John was just the recipient of the book as he just wrote
down what he was told. Paul said, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is
useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2
Tim 3:16). Paul clearly said that all Scripture is God-breathed…not just
the New Testament or the Old Testament, but all Scripture. Peter
reiterates it by writing, “For prophecy never had its origin in the will of
man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit”
(2 Pet 1:21). Peter would tell you that “you must understand that no
prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation” (2
Pet 1:20).
God gives a very serious warning to anyone who takes away or adds to any of
the words in the Bible, indicating that only He gives the words of this
book and no human had better tamper with it. In Revelation 22:19 God warns
that if anyone adds to or takes away any of the words of the Bible, He
“…shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy
city (heaven or the new Jerusalem)”. This same warning is given in the Old
Testament in Deuteronomy 4:2.
Alleged Errors in Transcribing
When the Word of God was reproduced to make another copy, well before the
printing press was invented, there were 70 scribes that worked on it with
expert precision second to none. Imagine that each of the scribes had the
other sixty-nine scribes check their writings for error. Each of these
seventy scribes reviewed each other’s work and every written copy, letter
by letter, line by line, book by book were examined meticulously. If any
errors were found, the started all over again on that particular book or
page. Imagine you’re one of the scribes and you have just finished a
section. Now the other sixty-nine scribes check your work and compare it
to the original. The amazing fact is that their methods resulted in such
an accurate reproduction of scripture that only one error for every fifteen
hundred words occurred and these errors were so slight that they never
affected the content. This copying left absolutely no room for any private
interpretation or mistranslation at all. By modern standards, the accuracy
rate is superior to that of Microsoft’s Spelling and Grammar Check, which
by the way is not perfect. When you consider the stringent guidelines and
conditions, no one can dispute that the translation differences had any
negative effect on the message of the Bible or its general context.
Manuscript Evidence
New Testament manuscripts have been preserved by the thousands and the fact
is that no other ancient works in human history have such enormous
documented and recorded histories as does the Bible. There are about 6,000
complete or fragmented Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin manuscripts and over
9,000 manuscripts in various other ancient languages. The dates of these
manuscripts range from the 2nd century up to the invention of the printing
press in the 15th century. Nearly ever year there are more New Testament
manuscripts discovered that were handwritten in the original Greek format
which continues to add to the enormous collection already on hand. In
2008, 47 new Greek manuscripts were discovered in Albania. Of these, 17 of
them were unknown to Western scholars.
The fact is that the amount of manuscript evidence is astounding. There
are over 25,000 New Testament manuscripts of which 5,000 of these date from
the first century. What that translates into for Historians is what is
called a primary source. A primary source is a source that comes from eye
witnesses. The nearly 6,000 Dead Sea Scrolls are so close in agreement,
contextually, that there is only 0.01% in differences and the main
differences are only in the differentiation of vowels. In no way do these
miniscule differences affect the text or the context.
One of the greatest supportive facts is that the evidence verifies the
dating of Matthew’s Gospel as far back as A.D. 60. Scholars argue that
Mark wrote the first Gospel. This places the composition of Mark to within
20 years of the events that took place and were recorded in his Gospel.
With the evidence that the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) and
Luke’s second volume, Acts, were written so close to the time of the
crucifixion, the record of the events of Jesus’ life, death, and
resurrection makes these facts indisputable. Luke and Acts was originally
one book but was later separated into two books for the reader’s
convenience but the content never changed. The fact that they were written
within the lifetimes of those who were eyewitnesses is evidence strong
enough to hold up in a court of law. Since the Old and New Testament
manuscripts have been preserved by the thousands and there are no other
ancient works in human history to compare to it, what we have today in the
Bible is as a reliable source as any current historical account or
newspaper printed today. The Bible is the Word of God, as men were moved
by the Holy Spirit to write it. It is God speaking to us and it is without
error and full of truth.
If God has revealed Himself in propositional form, that revelation would
have certain properties due to His infinite knowledge and moral perfection:
It would be entirely true - His infinite knowledge would prevent errors and
His truthfulness would keep Him from deception.
It would be a coherent unity, therefore not self- contradictory.
It would contain God's will for man, and provide the motivation to live
according to that will (1).
God has revealed Himself in the Bible without error. The Bible itself
claims this inerrancy (2 Timothy 3:16-17 (2); Matthew 5:18 (3); etc.).
Let's look at some of the proofs for the Bible's claim to be the infallible
word of God.
Archaeological evidence
The first proof we have testifying to the reliability of the Bible is the
archaeological evidence. Nelson Glueck, a respected Jewish archaeologist
claims: "It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery
has ever contradicted a biblical reference." (4) The liberals made wild
claims against the Bible a hundred years ago but now they are silent. This
is not true of other religions. The Mormon claim for inspiration of the
Book of Mormon has been categorically condemned by the Smithsonian
Institute because of the fallacies shown by archaeology; this is not so
with the Bible. A.N. Sherwin-White, a respected classical historian at
Oxford says, "For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming...",
although, not being a Christian, he still regarded it as being
"propaganda."(5)
Historicity of Jesus
A case in point is the historicity of Jesus. Although many atheists state
that Jesus never lived, He is mentioned by many contemporary, non-Christian
historians. Let us look at the evidence.
Flavius Josephus, a first century Jewish historian wrote of Jesus and the
Christians:
"so he [Ananus, son of Ananus the high priest] assembled the sanhedrin of
judges, and brought before him the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ,
whose name was James, and some others (or some of his companions) and when
he had formed an accusation against them, he delivered them to be stoned."
(6)
Other Jewish rabbinical writings, including Rabbi Eliezer and writers of
the Talmud, talk about Jesus and his miracles. Surprisingly to many
atheists, they never denied that miracles took place, but attempted to
explain them as a result of evil (7). More information about Jesus in the
Talmud can be found at Jesus Christ In The Talmud.
Cornelius Tacitus wrote about Jesus and the first century Christians in his
Annals (a history of the Roman empire):
"Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty
during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators,
Pontius Pilatus." (8)
Thallus, a Samaritan historian, wrote ca. 52 A.D. attempting to give a
natural explanation for the earthquake and darkness which occurred at the
crucifixion of Jesus. Mara Bar-Seraphon wrote a letter to his son in 73
A.D. which tells of the deaths of Socrates, Pythagoras, and of Jesus, "What
advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king?...Nor did the
wise king die for good; he lived on in the teaching which he had given."
Jesus is also mentioned by Phlegon, a first-century historian, Lucian of
Samosata (in The Passing Peregrinus), and Plinius Secundus, (Pliny the
Younger).
Scholars have made statements such as, "no serious scholar has ventured to
postulate the non-historicity of Jesus ." (9) The latest version of
Encyclopedia Britannica says in its discussion of the multiple
extra-biblical witnesses:
"These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents
of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed
for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end
of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries."
(10)
Even the atheist H. G. Wells spoke of Jesus, "...one is obliged to say,
"Here was a man. This part of the tale could not have been invented." (11)
Scientific evidence
Recent scientific evidence is adding to the evidence supporting the
reliability of biblical chronology from the scriptures. This study
demonstrated the reliability of the Biblical record regarding the Egyptian
plagues and demise of Jericho.
Drs. Hendrik J. Bruins and Johannes van der Plicht reported in the
prestigious British journal, Nature (12), that the destruction of Jericho
was dated to 1580 (+/- 13 years) B.C. (using 14C dating). This date is
significant, since several archeologists have insisted that Jericho was
destroyed by the Egyptians between 1550 and 1300 B.C. The recent study
discredits the Egyptian theory, since the date is much too old.
What is even more exciting is that scientists, using 14C dating and tree
rings, have found evidence of a volcanic eruption from the Aegean island of
Thera, which recently has been dated to 1628 B.C. (13). This would place
the eruption at 45 years prior to the destruction of Jericho, at a time
which coincidentally corresponds to the time of the plagues the Lord
unleashed upon Egypt. Check out Exodus 10:
Then the Lord said to Moses, "Stretch out your hand toward the sky, that
there may be darkness over the land of Egypt, even a darkness which may be
felt." So Moses stretched out his hand toward the sky, and there was thick
darkness in all the land of Egypt for three days. (Exodus 10:21-22)
Even the researchers commented that the 45 years difference in events was
"rather striking."
The Bible's Uniqueness and Unity
The next proof is the Bible's uniqueness and unity. The Bible was written
by over 40 authors who came from just about every walk of life conceivable,
including fisherman, kings, a butler, priests, and a tax collector. The 66
books of the Bible were written over a 1,500 year span in three languages
on three continents with one theme and no contradictions. C.J. Sharp
captures this miracle well:
"If a fragment of stone were found in Italy, another in Asia Minor, another
in Greece, another in Egypt, and on and on until sixty-six fragments had
been found, and if when put together they fitted perfectly together, making
a perfect statue of Venus de Milo, there is not an artist or scientist but
would arrive immediately at the conclusion that there was originally a
sculptor who conceived and carved the statue. The very lines and
perfections would probably determine which of the great ancient artists
carved the statue. Not only the unity of the Scriptures, but their lines of
perfection, suggest One far above any human as the real author. That could
be no one but God (14)."
Prophetic evidence
Yet another reason Christians believe God is the ultimate author of the
Bible is the predictive prophecies in the Bible. This aspect is unique to
the world's religions because if one predicts something will happen and it
does not, they are proven to be phony. The Bible is literally filled with
detailed prophecies that have been fulfilled with 100% accuracy. Here is a
list of 85 Messianic prophecies along with their fulfillment through the
life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus:
Prophecies of Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah
#Prophetic ScriptureSubjectFulfilled
1
Genesis 3:15
seed of a woman
Galatians 4:4
2
Genesis 12:3, Genesis 22:18
descendant of Abraham
Matthew 1:1, Acts 3:25
3
Genesis 17:19, Genesis 21:12
descendant of Isaac
Luke 3:34, Luke 3:23-24
4
Genesis 28:14, Numbers 24:17
descendant of Jacob
Matthew 1:2, Luke 3:23-24
5
Genesis 49:10
from the tribe of Judah
Luke 3:23-24, Luke 3:33
6
Isaiah 9:6, 11:1-5, Jeremiah 23:5-6
descendant of David
Matthew 1:1, Luke 3:23-24
7
Isaiah 11:1
descendant of Jesse
Luke 3:23-24
8
Ezekiel 37:24
will shepherd His people
Matthew 2:6
9
Isaiah 9:7
heir to the throne of David
Luke 1:32-33
10
Micah 5:2
His pre-existence
Colossians 1:17
11
Isaiah 9:6, Micah 5:1
eternal existence
John 8:58, 11, 14, Ephesians 1:3-14, Colossians 1:15-19
12
Psalm 45:6-7, Psalm 102:25-27
anointed and eternal
Hebrews 1:8-12
13
Psalm 110:1
called Lord
Matthew 22:43-45
14
Isaiah 33:22
judge
John 5:30
15
Psalm 2:6
king
Matthew 27:37
16
Micah 5:2
born in Bethlehem
Matthew 2:1, Luke 2:4-5, 7
17
Daniel 9:25
time for His birth
Matthew 2:1, 16, 19, Luke 2:1-2
18
Isaiah 7:14
to be born of a virgin
Matthew 1:18, 24, 25, Luke 1:26-27, 30-31
19
Psalm 72:9
worshipped by shepherds
Luke 2:8-15
20
Psalm 72:10
honored by great kings
Matthew 2:1-11
21
Jeremiah 31:15
slaughter of children
Matthew 2:16-18
22
Hosea 11:1
flight to Egypt
Matthew 2:14-15
23
Isaiah 40:3-5
the way prepared
Matthew 3:1,2, Luke 3:3-6
24
Malachi 3:1
preceded by a forerunner
Luke 7:24, 27
25
Malachi 4:5-6
preceded by Elijah
Matthew 11:13-14
26
Psalm 2:7, Proverbs 30:4
declared the Son of God
Matthew 3:17, Luke 1:32
27
Isaiah 9:5-6, Jeremiah 23:5-6
God's name applied to Him
Romans 10:9, Philippians 2:9-11
28
Isaiah 11:2, 61:1, Psalm 45:8
anointment of Holy Spirit
Matthew 3:16, 17, John 3:34, Acts 10:38
29
Isaiah 9:1-2
Galilean ministry
Matthew 4:13-16
30
Psalm 78:2-4
speaks in parables
Matthew 13:34-35
31
Isaiah 56:7, Jeremiah 7:11
temple becomes a house of merchandise instead of prayer
Matthew 21:13
32
Psalm 69:9
zeal of Jews for the temple instead of God
John 2:17
33
Deuteronomy 18:15, 18
a prophet
Matthew 21:11, Acts 3:20, 22
34
Isaiah 29:18, Isaiah 35:5-6
blind, deaf, and lame are healed by the Messiah
Luke 7:22, Matthew 9:35, 11:3-5
35
Isaiah 40:11, 42:2-3, Isaiah 53:7
Messiah will be meek and mild
Matthew 12:18-20, Matthew 11:29, Hebrews 4:15
36
Isaiah 53:9
Be sinless and without guile
1 Peter 2:22
37
Isaiah 42:1, Isaiah 49:1
will minister to Gentiles
Matthew 12:18-21Luke 2:32
38
Isaiah 61:1-2
to bind up the brokenhearted
Luke 4:18-19
39
Isaiah 53:12, Isaiah 59:16
to intercede for the people
Romans 8:34, Hebrews 7:25
40
Isaiah 53:3, 8:14, 28:16, 63:3, Psalms 69:6, 118:22
rejected by His own people, the Jews
John 1:11, 7:5,48, Luke 23:18, Acts 4:11, 1 Peter 2:6-8
41
Psalm 118:22
Be rejected by the Jewish leadership
Matthew 21:42, John 7:48
42
Psalm 2:1-2
plotted against by Jews and Gentiles alike
Acts 4:27
43
Psalm 110:4
priest after the order of Melchizedek
Hebrews 5:5-6
44
Zechariah 9:9
enter Jerusalem on donkey
Mark 11:7, 9, 11, Luke 19:35-37
45
Haggai 2:7-9, Malachi 3:1
entered the temple with authority
Matthew 21:12, Luke 2:27-38
46
Psalm 8:2
adored by infants
Matthew 21:15-16
47
Isaiah 53:1
not believed
John 12:37-38
48
Zechariah 13:7
sheep of the Shepherd scattered
Matthew 26:31, Mark 14:50
49
Psalm 41:9, 55:13-15
betrayed by a close friend
Matthew 10:4, Luke 22:47-48
50
Zechariah 11:12
betrayed for thirty pieces of silver
Matthew 26:14-15
51
Zechariah 11:13
betrayal money used to buy Potter's field
Matthew 27:6-7
52
Psalm 35:11
accused by false witnesses
Mark 14:57-58
53
Isaiah 53:7
silent to accusations
Matthew 27:12, Mark 15:4-5
54
Isaiah 50:6
spat on
Matthew 26:67, 27:30
55
Isaiah 50:6
beaten
Matthew 26:67, 27:26, 30
56
Micah 4:14
struck on cheek
Matthew 27:30
57
Isaiah 49:7, Psalm 35:19, Psalm 69:4
hated without reason
John 7:48, 15:24-25
58
Isaiah 53:5
wounded and bruised
Matthew 27:26
59
Isaiah 53:5
vicarious sacrifice
John 1:29, , 3:16, Romans 5:6, 8
60
Daniel 9:24-26
cut off, but not for Himself
Matthew 2:1, Luke 3:1, 23
61
Isaiah 53:12
crucified with malefactors
Matthew 27:38, Mark 15:27-28
62
Zechariah 12:10, Psalm 22:16
pierced through hands and feet
Luke 23:33, John 20:25-27
63
Psalm 22:7-8
sneered and mocked
Matthew 27:31, Luke 23:35
64
Psalm 109:24, 25
fell under the cross
Luke 23:26
65
Psalm 69:9
was reproached
Romans 15:3
66
Psalm 38:11
friends stood afar off
Luke 23:49
67
Psalm 109:25
people shook their heads
Matthew 27:39
68
Psalm 22:17
stared upon
Luke 23:35
69
Psalm 22:16, 69:21
given vinegar for His thirst
Matthew 27:34, John 19:28-29
70
Psalm 109:4, Isaiah 53:12
prayer for His enemies
Luke 23:34
71
Psalm 22:17-18
soldiers gambled for His clothing
Matthew 27:35-36, John 19:23, 24
72
Psalm 22:1
forsaken by God
Matthew 27:46
73
Psalm 31:5
committed Himself to God
Luke 23:46
74
Exodus 12:46, Psalm 34:20
no bones broken
John 19:32, 33, 36
75
Psalm 22:14
heart broken
John 19:34
76
Zechariah 12:10
His side pierced
John 19:34
77
Amos 8:9
darkness over the land
Matthew 27:45
78
Isaiah 53:9
buried with the rich
Matthew 27:57-60
79
Psalm 3:5, 16:10, 49:15
to be resurrected
Mark 16:6-7, Acts 2:31
80
Isaiah 44:3, Joel 2:28
sent the Holy Spirit
John 20:22, Acts 2:16-17
81
Isaiah 55:3-4, Jeremiah 31:31
establishes a new covenant
Matthew 26:28, Luke 22:20, Hebrews 8:6-10
82
Psalm 68:18, Psalm 110:1
His ascension to God's right hand
Mark 16:19, Acts 1:9, 1 Corinthians 15:4, Ephesians 4:8, Hebrews 1:3
83
Psalm 29:11, Micah 4:3
peace proclaimed by disciples
Luke 2:14, John 14:27, Acts 10:36
84
Isaiah 60:3
"Light" to Gentiles
Acts 13:47,48
85
Isaiah 11:10, 42:1, 49:1-12
the Gentiles will seek the Messiah
Romans 11:25, 15:10
Although some of these prophecies are vague and could have been
deliberately fulfilled, many are very specific: 16. Place of birth (Micah
5:2). 17. Date of birth (Daniel 9:25). 18. Manner of birth (Isaiah 7:14).
62. Manner of death (Zechariah 12:10; Psalm 22:16 prophesied before the
invention of crucifixion). 76. Piercing in side (Zechariah 12:10). 78.
Burial (Isaiah 53:9).
The Bible made several prophecies of the complete destruction of cities.
Many of the cities it said would be rebuilt and several it claimed would
never be rebuilt - The Bible is 100% accurate in both categories as
archeology shows. One amazing example is the city of Tyre. Ezekiel
26:3-5,7,12,14 and (15) predict:
Nebuchadnezzar will take the city.
Other nations will participate in the fulfillment.
The city is to be made flat like the top of a rock.
It is to become a place for spreading nets.
Its stones and timber are to be laid in the sea.
The old city of Tyre will never be rebuilt.
History records that Nebuchadnezzar took the adjacent mainland settlement
of Ushu ("Old Tyre"), but the people escaped out to the island city. Later,
Alexander the Great took the island off the coast by taking the old city's
rubble and throwing it into the sea making a land-bridge (this caused the
old city to look flat like a rock due to the scraping of the material). The
old city is now a place for fisherman but no city has been planted there
even though there is an excellent water supply to support a major city.
Shelly, Rubel. 1990. Prepare To Answer. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, p
92.
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof,
for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be
adequate, equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16)
"For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest
letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished."
(Matthew 5:18)
Nelson Glueck, Rivers in the Desert, Farrar, Strauss and Cudahy, New York,
1959, p. 31.
"For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. Yet Acts is, in
simple terms and judged externally, no less a propaganda document than the
Gospels, liable to similar distortion. But any attempt to reject its basic
historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd." A. N.
Sherwin-White. 1978. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament.
Baker, Grand Rapids, p. 189.
Flavius Josephus The Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1
Matthew 12:24, Mark 3:22, Luke 11:15, Flavius Josephus The Antiquities of
the Jews 18:63, Talmud P. Ta'an. 65b, and the Sanhedrin 3a
Cornelius Tacitus Annals 15.44 from The Tech Classics Archive translated by
Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb
Otto Betz. 1968. What do We Know about Jesus?, SCM Press, page 9.
Encyclopedia Britannica (Article on "Jesus")
H. G. Wells, Outline Of History.
Bruins, H.J. and J. van der Plicht. 1996. The Exodus enigma. Nature 382:
213-214.
Friedrich, W.L., P. Wagner, and H. Tauber. 1990. Thera and the Aegean World
III Thera Foundation, London, UK.
Kuniholm, P.I., B. Kromer, S.W. Manning, M. Newton, C.E. Latini, and M.J.
Bruce. 1996. Anatolian tree rings and the absolute chronology of the
eastern Mediterranean, 2220-718 BC. Nature 381: 780-783.
Renfrew, C. 1996. Kings, tree rings and the old world. Nature 381: 733-734.
Shelly, Rubel. 1990. Prepare To Answer. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, p
114.
therefore, thus says the Lord God,` Behold, I am against you, O Tyre, and I
will bring up many nations against you, as the sea brings up its waves. And
they will destroy the walls of Tyre and break down her towers; and I will
scrape her debris from her and make her a bare rock. She will be a place
for the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea, for I have spoken,'
declares the Lord God, `and she will become spoil for the nations.'... For
thus says the Lord God, "Behold, I will bring upon Tyre from the north
Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses, chariots,
cavalry, and a great army.... Also they will make a spoil of your riches
and a prey of your merchandise, break down your walls and destroy your
pleasant houses, and throw your stones and your timbers and your debris
into the water.... And I will make you a bare rock; you will be a place for
the spreading of nets. You will be built no more, for I the Lord have
spoken," declares the Lord God.... "Then all the princes of the sea will go
down from their thrones, remove their robes, and strip off their
embroidered garments. They will clothe themselves with trembling; they will
sit on the ground, tremble every moment, and be appalled at you." (Ezekiel
26:3-5,7,12,14,16)
Is the Bible inspired?
The doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible means that the Bible in the
original documents is God-breathed, and that it is a divine product; and
because it is divine, the original documents are inerrant. The copies of
those documents are not inspired. We have copies of inspired documents.
2 Tim. 3:16-17 says, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for
teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17
that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." Paul
who wrote this epistle was obviously referring to the entirety of the Old
Testament as being inspired. The word "inspired" is literally
"God-breathed." This is an interesting phrase since it implies that the
Scriptures are from the mouth of God. Likewise, Peter says in 2 Pet. 1:21,
"for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by
the Holy Spirit spoke from God." Notice that Peter is stating that prophecy
is not the product of human will. Instead, prophecy occurs by those moved
by the Holy Spirit.
Furthermore, we can easily see that the Old Testament Scriptures are full
of statements and phrases claiming to be the Word of God.
"Thus says the Lord" occurs 418 times in the NASB, 413 in the KJV
Exodus 4:22, "Then you shall say to Pharaoh, Thus says the Lord, 'Israel is
My son, My first-born.'"
1 Kings 11:31, "And he said to Jeroboam, 'Take for yourself ten pieces; for
thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, Behold, I will tear the kingdom out
of the hand of Solomon and give you ten tribes.'"
Isaiah 7:7, "thus says the Lord God, 'It shall not stand nor shall it come
to pass.'"
"God said" occurs 46 times in both the NASB and the KJV
Genesis 1:3, "Then God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light."
Exodus 3:14, "And God said to Moses, 'I AM WHO I AM'; and He said, "Thus
you shall say to the sons of Israel, I AM has sent me to you."
Exodus 6:2-3, "God spoke further to Moses and said to him, 'I am the Lord;
and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My
name, Lord, I did not make Myself known to them.'"
God spoke through prophets
1 Kings 14:18, "And all Israel buried him and mourned for him, according to
the word of the Lord which He spoke through His servant Ahijah the prophet."
2 Sam. 24:11-12, "When David arose in the morning, the word of the Lord
came to the prophet Gad, David's seer, saying, 12 'Go and speak to David,
Thus the Lord says, "I am offering you three things; choose for yourself
one of them, which I may do to you."'"
Zech. 7:7, "Are not these the words which the Lord proclaimed by the former
prophets, when Jerusalem was inhabited and prosperous with its cities
around it, and the Negev and the foothills were inhabited?"
The Spirit of the Lord spoke through people
2 Sam. 23:2, "The Spirit of the Lord spoke by me, and His word was on my
tongue."
1 Kings 22:24, "Then Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah came near and struck
Micaiah on the cheek and said, 'How did the Spirit of the Lord pass from me
to speak to you?'"
2 Chron. 20:14-15, "Then in the midst of the assembly the Spirit of the
Lord came upon Jahaziel the son of Zechariah, the son of Benaiah, the son
of Jeiel, the son of Mattaniah, the Levite of the sons of Asaph; 15 and he
said, 'Listen, all Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem and King
Jehoshaphat: thus says the Lord to you, Do not fear or be dismayed because
of this great multitude, for the battle is not yours but God's.'"
As you can see, the Old Testament Scriptures are clearly full of statements
showing the inspiration of God through the writers. The Old Testament
assumes and speaks from the perspective of divine inspiration. Should we do
any less?
What about the New Testament?
We see that the Old Testament is repeatedly spoken of as being inspired via
the numerous references cited above but what about the New Testament? Are
the New Testament books inspired as well?
The Christian church has always considered the New Testament documents to
be inspired. Though in the early church there were some debates on which
New Testament books to include in the Bible, God worked through the
Christian church to recognize those inspired works. Therefore we now have
27 inspired books for the New Testament.
In 1 Cor. 14:37 Paul said, "If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual,
let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's
commandment." In 2 Pet. 3:16 Peter said, "as also in all [Paul's] letters,
speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to
understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the
rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." Also, Jesus said in John
14:26, "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My
name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that
I said to you." This means that the Lord has commissioned the apostles to
accurately record what Jesus had said because the Holy Spirit would be
working in them.
So, we can see that Jesus promised direction from the Holy Spirit, that
Paul considered what he wrote to be the commands of God, and that Peter
recognized Paul's writings as Scripture. In addition, since the Christian
Church recognizes the 27 books of the New Testament are inspired and since
we see internal claims of inspiration in the New Testament, we conclude
that inspiration applies to the New Testament documents as well.
Objections
Inspiration violates free will.
A. Inspiration does not violate free will. What if the person through whom
God is working has been regenerated by the Holy Spirit and desires to have
the Lord speak through him? Would this negate the ability of God to
inerrantly speak through such a person? Would it also mean that the person
has no free will if he has voluntarily subjected his will to the will of
God?
B. Certainly, God has the ability to work through individuals to bring them
to a place where they can record inerrant statements. Cannot God manifest
himself to someone, deliver to him a verbal message, and have that person
record it? Would that statement not be inspired of God?
C. Proverbs. 21:1,"The king's heart is like channels of water in the hand
of the Lord; he turns it wherever He wishes." This verse clearly states
that God is able to work through an individual's "free will" to bring about
what God desires.
2. What about the numerous contradictions in the Bible?
A. It is true that there are difficulties with in the Word of God. But
these are due to copying errors through the centuries. As more and more
historical, archaeological, and manuscript evidence is uncovered, the fewer
Bible difficulties there are. Nevertheless, for an examination of answers
to the alleged Bible contradictions, please see www.BibleQuery.org.
3. The manuscript evidence doesn't support inerrancy of the originals.
A. This is a subjective conclusion. The more I have studied about the
ancient manuscripts, the more I have concluded that the original documents
were indeed inspired and inerrant.
B. The logical implication of the statements within the Bible is that they
are inerrant since they claim to be offered from God. They either are or
are not inspired of God. If they are not, then their claims of speaking
for God are lies.
4. Inspiration applies to scripture--not people.
A. God works sovereignly through people to inspire his documents. It is
the people whom God indwells with his spirit and the people who are
inspired by God to write his word. If inspiration only refers to
Scripture, and somehow means that people are not themselves inspired, the
Scriptures are still God-breathed and necessarily inerrant.
For more see our website www.BibleQuery.org.
See our video "EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH HISTORY PROVES ROMAN CATHOLICISM
FALSE" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP9jg2h3xjQ&index=8&list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715.
Also see the anti Vatican 2 Romanist website
//www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/. Has a Roman Catholic Pope made a
wrong statement when speaking "ex-Cathedra and infallible" thereby
destroying the Romanist claim that the pope is infallible? Today's post
Vatican 2 Romanists being led by the likes of John Paul II, Benedict XVI,
Francis & others might claim that Pope Eugene IV blew it by agreeing with
the Council of Florence held in 1438-1439 A.D. What did Pope Eugene say
that today's ecumenical & all inclusive Romanists would not like? Here's
what he declared in approval of the Council of Florence - "Pope Eugene IV,
Council of Florence (ex-Cathedra and infallible): “The Holy Roman Church
firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the
Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics,
cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which
was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the
Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical
body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the
Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and
other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal
rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away
in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has
persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church” (“Cantate
Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra)." If Eugene was wrong in what he said according
to today's Romanists then papal infallibility is a lie & a sham. If today's
popes are wrong on this issue in regard to popes of the past then their
infallibility is a lie & a sham. The Roman Catholic church did not teach
universal salvation of all religious beliefs like it does now (see our
videos: "Roman Catholicism Series #16: Old Romanism Contradicts Vatican 2
New Romanism - Shifting Doctrines" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h953sZHCmAk & "Roman Catholicism Series
#15: Rome Says Even Atheists Will Be Saved Because of Their Sincerity!" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYa8g-FLeqQ). The Roman Catholic
inquisition proved Roman Catholicism throughout the centuries did not hold
to a Vatican 2 type of universal salvation as it does now (see "MARTYRS FOR
CHRIST: THE MURDEROUS ROMAN CATHOLIC INQUISITION" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iy95g5VhQ7w). Pope Honorius I (died 12
October 638) reigned from 27 October 625 to his death in 638[1] proves that
the infallibility of the pope is a sham because he can be totally wrong
whether he speaks "from the chair" or not & only someone willingly blind
cannot see it for what it is. Honorius, according to the Liber
Pontificalis, came from Campania and was the son of the consul Petronius.
He became pope two days after the death of his predecessor, Boniface V. The
festival of the Elevation of the Cross is said to have been instituted
during the pontificate of Honorius, which was marked also by considerable
missionary enterprise. Much of this was centered on England, especially
Wessex. He also succeeded in bringing the Irish Easter celebrations in line
with the rest of the Catholic Church.Although Honorius never issued a
dogmatic (ex cathedra) decree in regard to the controversy of Christ's
wills,[1] he favoured Monothelitism. He supported a formula proposed by the
Byzantine Emperor Heraclius with the design of bringing about a
reconciliation between Monothelites and the rest of the Catholic Church.
Monothelitism is the teaching that Christ has only one will, the divine
will, in contrast with the teaching that He has both a divine will and a
human will. To this end, Honorius "sent his deacon Gaios" to a synod in
Cyprus in 634 hosted by Archbishop Arkadios II with additional
representatives from Patriarch Sergius I of Constantinople. The
anti-Monothelite side in Jerusalem, championed by Maximus the Confessor and
Sophronius of Jerusalem, sent to this synod Anastasius (a pupil of
Maximus), George of Reshaina (a pupil of Sophronius), two of George of
Raishana's own pupils, and eight bishops from Palestine. When the two sides
were presented to the Emperor, the Emperor persisted with Monothelitism and
so did Honorius. (George of Reshaina, "An Early Life of Maximus the
Confessor", 316–7)He was apparently aware of the rise of
Islam.[2]AnathematizationMore than forty years after his death, Honorius
was anathematized by name along with the Monothelites by the Third Council
of Constantinople (First Trullan) in 680. The anathema read, after
mentioning the chief Monothelites, "and with them Honorius, who was Prelate
of Rome, as having followed them in all things".Furthermore, the Acts of
the Thirteenth Session of the Council state, "And with these we define that
there shall be expelled from the holy Church of God and anathematized
Honorius who was some time Pope of Old Rome, because of what we found
written by him to [Patriarch] Sergius, that in all respects he followed his
view and confirmed his impious doctrines." The Sixteenth Session adds: "To
Theodore of Pharan, the heretic, anathema! To Sergius, the heretic,
anathema! To Cyrus, the heretic, anathema! To Honorius, the heretic,
anathema! To Pyrrhus, the heretic, anathema!"This condemnation was
subsequently confirmed by Leo II (a fact disputed by such persons as Cesare
Baronio and Bellarmine,[3] but which has since become commonly accepted) in
the form, "and also Honorius, who did not attempt to sanctify this
Apostolic Church with the teaching of Apostolic tradition, but by profane
treachery permitted its purity to be polluted". The New Catholic
Encyclopedia notes: "It is in this sense of guilty negligence that the
papacy ratified the condemnation of Honorius." That is, the papacy
condemned Honorius not for teaching a heresy ex cathedra, but for
negligently permitting heretical positions to stand alongside orthodox
ones.This anathema against Honorius was later one of the main arguments
against Papal infallibility in the discussions surrounding the First
Vatican Council of 1870, where the episode was not ultimately regarded as
contrary to the proposed dogma. This was because Honorius was not
considered by the supporters of infallibility to be speaking ex cathedra in
the letters in question (although the Roman historian Hefele and opponents
of the definition believed that Honorius had spoken ex cathedra),[1] and he
was alleged to have never been condemned as a Monothelite, nor, asserted
the proponents of infallibility, was he condemned for teaching heresy, but
rather for gross negligence and a lax leadership at a time when his letters
and guidance were in a position to quash the heresy at its roots.Historian
Jaroslav Pelikan notes: "It is evident, as Maximus noted in exoneration of
Honorius, that his opposition to the idea of 'two wills' was based on the
interpretation of 'two wills' as 'two contrary wills.' He did not mean that
Christ was an incomplete human being, devoid of a human will, but that as a
human being he did not have any action in his body nor any will in his soul
that could be contrary to the action and will of God, that is, to the
action and will of his own divine nature." References: 1. Chapman, John
(1910). "Pope Honorius I". Catholic Encyclopedia 7. New York: Robert
Appleton Company. 2. Muhammad Ata Ur-Rahim; Ahmad Thomson (2003). Jesus:
Prophet of Islam. TTQ, INC. p. 148. ISBN 9781879402737. 3. Perlant, M.
Jean-Andre (June 1994). "The Sullied Reputation of a Holy Pope". The
Francinta Messenger. 4. Pelikan, Jaroslav. "The Spirit of Eastern
Christendom (600-1700)". The Christian Tradition 2. University of Chicago
Press. p. 151. ISBN 0-226-65373-0. The Roman Catholic Council of Vatican I
in 1870 is renowned for its dogmatic teaching that the Bishops of Rome,
when teaching ex cathedra, are infallible. This teaching was stated to be
consistent with the belief and practice the Church from its inception and
throughout its long history. In other words it taught that this doctrine
was not a doctrine that developed over time. The Council declared this
teaching to be a dogma necessary to be believed for salvation and it
anathematizes all who dare to disagree with or who oppose these assertions.
The official teaching of Vatican I is as follows:Therefore faithfully
adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian
faith, for the glory of God our Saviour, the exaltation of the Christian
religion, and the salvation of Christian people, the sacred Council
approving, we teach and define that it is a dogma divinely revealed: that
the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when in discharge
of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his
supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith and
morals to be held by the universal Church, by the divine assistance
promised to him in blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with
which the divine redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed for
defining doctrine regarding faith or morals; and that therefore such
definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of themselves, and not
from the consent of the Church. But if anyone—which may God avert—presume
to contradict this our definition: let him be anathema...This is the
teaching of Catholic truth, from which no one can deviate without loss of
faith and salvation...The first condition of salvation is to keep the rule
of the true faith (Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom (New York:
Harper, 1877), Dogmatic Decrees of the Vatican Council, Chp. 4, pp.
266-71).Though Vatican I appeals to history as a valdation for its claims,
it is the very facts of history which prove them to be spurious.
Historically, papal infallibility was never part of the teaching or
practice of the early Church, nor was it ever part of the doctrinal content
of saving faith as taught by it. This is well illustrated by the actions of
the 6th Ecumenical Council (III Constantinople) held in 680-681 A.D. This
Council is well known in Church history for its official condemnation of a
number of leading Eastern Bishops as well as a Bishop of Rome for embracing
and promoting heretical teachings. The particular Pope who was posthumously
excommunicated from the Church and forever branded a heretic was Pope
Honorius, who reigned as bishop of Rome from 625 to 638 A.D. In a number of
letters written to Sergius I, patriarch of Constantinople, and several
other individuals, Honorius officially embraced the heresy of montheletism,
which teaches that Christ had only one will, the divine. The orthodox
position is that Christ, though one person, possesses two wills because he
is divine and human. There is absolutely no doubt that he held to the
teaching of one will in Christ. Jaroslav Pelikan makes these comments:In
the controversy between East and West...the case of Honorius served as
proof to Photius that the popes not only lacked authority over church
councils, but were fallible in matters of dogma; for Honorius had embraced
the heresy of the Monotheletes. The proponents of that heresy likewise
cited the case of Honorius, not in opposition to the authority of the
pope but in support of their own doctrine, urging that all teachers of the
true faith had confessed it, including Sergius, the bishop of New Rome,
and Honorius, the bishop of Old Rome (Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian
Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine (Chicago: University
of Chicago, 1974), Volume Two, pp. 150-151).There are many past and present
Roman apologists who downplay the importance of Pope Honorius. It is
typical in Roman Catholic writings to find the issue of Honorius dealt with
in a very superficial way. For example the following comments by Karl
Keating are representative:Actually, Honorius elected to teach nothing at
all. Ronald Knox, in a letter to Arnold Lunn reprinted in their book
Difficulties, put the matter like this: And Honorius, so far from
pronouncing an infallible opinion in the Monothelite controversy, was
quite extraordinarily not (as Gore used to say) pronouncing a decision at
all. To the best of his human wisdom, he thought the controversy ought to
be left unsettled, for the greater peace of the Church. In fact, he was
an opportunist. We, wise after the event, say that he was wrong. But
nobody, I think, has ever claimed that the Pope is infallible in not
defining a doctrine (Karl Keating, Catholicism and Fundamentalism (San
Francisco: Ignatius, 1988), p. 229).In one paragraph Keating dismisses
this whole issue as trivial and Protestant objections as nothing more than
a misrepresentation of the true facts. But one thing Mr. Keating does not
do is to give the judgment of the Council itself in its own words. He
simply states that Honorius did not teach anything and is therefore not
guilty of heresy. Is this how the Council understood the situation?
Absolutely not! To allow the Council to speak for itself is enough to
dispel Keating and Knox's assertions. The facts speak for themselves.
Honorius was personally condemned as a heretic by the Sixth Ecumenical
Council. This was ratified by two succeeding Ecumenical Councils. He was
also condemned by name by Pope Leo II, and by every pope up through the
eleventh century who took the oath of papal office. In his classic and
authoritative series on the history of the Councils, Roman Catholic
historian Charles Joseph Hefele affirms this verdict in relating the
following irrefutable facts regarding Honorius and the Sixth Ecumenical
Council:It is in the highest degree startling, even scarcely credible,
that an Ecumenical Council should punish with anathema a Pope as a
heretic!...That, however, the sixth Ecumenical Synod actually condemned
Honorius on account of heresy, is clear beyond all doubt, when we consider
the following collection of the sentences of the Synod against him: At
the entrance of the thirteenth session, on March 28, 681, the Synod says:
"After reading the doctrinal letter of Sergius of Constantinople to Cyrus
of Phasis (afterwards of Alexandria) and to Pope Honorius, and also the
letter of the latter to Sergius, we found that these documents were quite
foreign...to the apostolic doctrines, and to the declarations of the holy
Councils and all the Fathers of note, and follow the false doctrines of
heretics. Therefore we reject them completely, and abhor...them as
hurtful to the soul. But also the names of these men must be thrust out
of the Church, namely, that of Sergius, the first who wrote on this
impious doctrine. Further, that of Cyrus of Alexandria, of Pyrrhus, Paul,
and Peter of Constantinople, and of Theodore of Pharan, all of whom also
Pope Agatho rejected in his letter to the Emperor. We punish them all with
anathema. But along with them, it is our universal decision that there
shall also be shut out from the Church and anathematized the former Pope
Honorius of Old Rome, because we found in his letter to Sergius, that in
everything he followed his view and confirmed his impious doctrine."
Towards the end of the same session the second letter of Pope Honorius to
Sergius was presented for examination, and it was ordered that all the
documents brought by George, the keeper of the archives in Constantinople,
and among them the two letters of Honorius, should immediately be burnt,
as hurtful to the soul. Again, the sixth Ecumenical Council referred to
Honorius in the sixteenth session, on August 9, 681, at the acclamations
and exclamations with which the transactions of this day were closed. The
bishops exclaimed: "Anathema to the heretic Sergius, to the heretic Cyrus,
to the heretic Honorius, to the heretic Pyrrhus" Still more important is
that which took place at the eighteenth and last session, on September 16,
681. In the decree of the faith which was now published, and forms the
principal document of the Synod, we read: "The creeds (of the earlier
Ecumenical Synods) would have sufficed for knowledge and confirmation of
the orthodox faith. Because, however, the originator of all evil still
always finds a helping serpent, by which he may diffuse his poison, and
therewith finds fit tools for his will, we mean Theodore of Pharan,
Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul, Peter, former bishops of Constantinople, also
Honorius, Pope of Old Rome, Cyrus of Alexandria, etc., so he failed not,
by them, to cause trouble in the Church by the scattering of the heretical
doctrine of one will and one energy of the two natures of the one Christ.
After the papal legates, all the bishops, and the Emperor had received
and subscribed this decree of the faith, the Synod published the usual
(logos prosphoneticos), which, addressed to the Emperor, says, among other
things: "Therefore we punish with exclusion and anathema, Theodore of
Pharan, Sergius, Paul, Pyrrhus, and Peter; also Cyrus, and with them
Honorius, formerly bishop of Rome, as he followed them." In the same
session the Synod also put forth a letter to Pope Agatho, and says
therein: \'91We have destroyed the effort of the heretics, and slain them
with anathema, in accordance with the sentence spoken before in your holy
letter, namely, Theodore of Pharan, Sergius, Honorius. In closest
connection with the Acts of the sixth Ecumenical Council stands the
imperial decree confirming their resolutions. The Emperor writes: "With
this sickness (as it came out from Apollinaris, Eutyches, Themistius,
etc.) did those unholy priests afterwards again infect the Church, who
before our times falsely governed several churches. These are Theodore of
Pharan, Sergius the former bishop of this chief city; also Honorius, the
Pope of old Rome...the strengthener (confirmer) of the heresy who
contradicted himself...We anathematise all heresy from Simon (Magus) to
this present...besides, we anathematise and reject the originators and
patrons of the false and new doctrines, namely, Theodore of Pharan,
Sergius...also Honorius, who was Pope of Old Rome, who in everything
agreed with them, went with them, and strengthened the heresy." It is
clear that Pope Leo II also anathematized Honorius...in a letter to the
Emperor, confirming the decrees of the sixth Ecumenical Council...in his
letter to the Spanish bishops...and in his letter to the Spanish King
Ervig. Of the fact that Pope Honorius had been anathematized by the sixth
Ecumenical Synod, mention is made by...the Trullan Synod, which was held
only twelve years after...Like testimony is also given repeatedly by the
seventh Ecumenical Synod; especially does it declare, in its principal
document, the decree of the faith: "We declare at once two wills and
energies according to the natures in Christ, just as the sixth Synod in
Constantinople taught, condemning...Sergius, Honorius, Cyrus, etc." The
like is asserted by the Synod or its members in several other places...To
the same effect the eighth Ecumenical Synod expresses itself. In the Liber
Diurnus the Formulary of the Roman Chancery (from the fifth to the
eleventh century), there is found the old formula for the papal
oath...according to which every new Pope, on entering upon his office, had
to swear that "he recognised the sixth Ecumenical Council, which smote
with eternal anathema the originators of the heresy (Monotheletism),
Sergius, Pyrrhus, etc., together with Honorius" (Charles Joseph Hefele,
A History of the Councils of the Church (Edinburgh: Clark, 1896), Volume
V, pp. 181-187).These facts are highly significant. Von Dollinger was the
leading Roman Catholic historian of the last century who taught Church
history for 47 years. He makes these comments:This one fact, that a Great
Council, universally received afterwards without hesitation throughout
the Church, and presided over by Papal legates, pronounced the dogmatic
decision of a Pope heretical, and anathematized him by name as a heretic
is a proof, clear as the sun at noonday, that the notion of any peculiar
enlightenment or in errancy of the Popes was then utterly unknown to the
whole Church (Janus (Johann Joseph Ignaz von Dollinger), The Pope and the
Council (Boston: Roberts, 1870), p. 61).Roman Catholic apologists
generally attempt to salvage the dogma of papal infallibility from the case
with Honorius by saying that he was not giving an ex cathedra statement but
merely his opinion as a private theologian. Therefore he was not condemned
in his official capacity as the pope. According to the Roman Catholic
Church there are certain conditions which must be met for the teaching of
the pope to fall within the overall guidelines of that which is considered
to be. He must be teaching in his official capacity as the pope and he must
be defining doctrine for the entire Church. The claim is made that Honorius
did not meet these conditions. However, a careful reading of the official
acts of the Council prove that it thought otherwise. The reader can judge
for himself from the Council's own statements how the situation with
Honorius was viewed and whether it would have agreed with the assertions of
Keating and Knox that Honorius did not actively teach anything. The Council
makes the following statements:Session XIII: The holy council said: After
we had reconsidered, according to the promise which we had made to your
highness, the doctrinal letters of Sergius, at one time patriarch of this
royal God protected city to Cyrus, who was then bishop of Phasius and to
Honorius some time Pope of Old Rome, as well as the letter of the latter
to the same Sergius, we find that these documents are quite foreign to
the apostolic dogmas, to the declarations of the holy Councils, and to
all the accepted Fathers, and that they follow the false teachings of the
heretics; therefore we entirely reject them, and execrate them as hurtful
to the soul. But the names of those men whose doctrines we execrate must
also be thrust forth from the holy Church of God, namely, that of Sergius
some time bishop of this God-preserved royal city who was the first to
write on this impious doctrine; also that of Cyrus of Alexandria, of
Pyrrhus, Paul, and Peter, who died bishops of this God preserved city, and
were like minded with them; and that of Theodore sometime bishop of
Pharan, all of whom the most holy and thrice blessed Agatho, Pope of Old
Rome, in his suggestion to our most pious and God preserved lord and
mighty Emperor, rejected, because they were minded contrary to our
orthodox faith, all of whom we define are to be subject to anathema. And
with these we define that there shall be expelled from the holy Church of
God and anathematized Honorius who was some time Pope of Old Rome, because
of what we found written by him to Sergius, that in all respects he
followed his view and confirmed his impious doctrines. Session XVI: To
Theodore of Pharan, the heretic, anathema! To Sergius, the heretic,
anathema! To Cyrus, the heretic, anathema! To Honorius, the heretic,
anathema! To Pyrrhus, the heretic, anathema! To Paul, the heretic,
anathema!... Session XVIII: But as the author of evil, who, in the
beginning, availed himself of the aid of the serpent, and by it brought
the poison of death upon the human race, has not desisted, but in like
manner now, having found suitable instruments for working out his will we
mean Theodorus, who was bishop of Pharan, Sergius, Pyrrhus...and moreover,
Honorius, who was Pope of the elder Rome...), has actively employed them
in raising up for the whole Church the stumbling blocks of one will and
one operation in the two natures of Christ our true God, one of the Holy
Trinity; thus disseminating, in novel terms, amongst the orthodox people,
an heresy similar to the mad and wicked doctrine of the impious
Apollinaris (Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), Volume XIV, The Seven Ecumenical
Councils, pp. 342-344).The above statements prove that the condemnation of
Honorius meets the basic criteria for ex cathedra statements. The following
points show this to be the case:The Council condemns him specifically as a
heretic and anathematized him in his official capacity as pope and not as
a private theologian. He is condemned for following after and confirming
the heresy of montheletism. He is condemned for actively disseminating
and propagating heretical teachings in his official capacity as pope which
affected the whole Church.To suggest that the Sixth Ecumenical Council
does not invalidate the teaching of papal infallibility because Honorius
did not make an ex cathedra statement is historically absurd. This is to
erect arbitrary conditions which were not existent at the time to save
oneself the embarrassment of a historical fact which undermines one's
position. The issue is not what do individual Roman Catholic apologists
say, but what did the Sixth Ecumenical Council say. On what basis did it
condemn Pope Honorius? By its own words it condemned him in his official
capacity as the bishop of Rome, not as a private theologian, for advancing
heretical teachings which it says were Satanically inspired and would
affect the entire Church. It specifically states that Honorius advanced
these teachings, approved of them, and in a positive sense was responsible
for disseminating them. And it condemns him by name as a heretic,
anathematizing him as such. According to both Roman Catholic and Orthodox
theology an Ecumenical Council is infallible so all the arguments which
attempt to dismiss the judgment of this Council saying that it was mistaken
or that it rushed to judgment or whatever, are simply erroneous and empty,
on the basis of their own theology. So an infallible Ecumenical Council
(from a Roman Catholic perspective) has condemned as a heretic a bishop of
Rome for teaching heresy. It is quite obvious that these Eastern fathers
did not view the bishops of Rome as infallible.John Meyendorff states that,
contrary to the assertions of many Roman Catholics that Honorius did in
fact teach the doctrine of monotheletism in a positive sense and helped
confirm Sergius in the heresy. Meyendorff gives this summary:This step into
Monotheletism, which he was first to make, is the famous fall of Honorius,
for which the Sixth ecumenical council condemned him (681) a condemnation
which, until the early Middle Ages, would be repeated by all popes at
their installation, since on such occasions they had to confess the faith
of the ecumenmical councils. It is understandable, therefore, that all the
critics of the doctrine of papal infallibility in later centuries.
Protestants, Orthodox and antiinfallibilists at Vatican I in 1870 would
refer to this case. Some Roman Catholic apologists try to show that the
expressions used by Honorius could be understood in an orthodox way, and
that there is no evidence that he deliberately wished to proclaim anything
else than the traditional faith of the Church. They also point out quite
anachronistically that the letter to Sergius was not a formal statement,
issued by the pope ex cathedra, using his charisma of infallibility, as if
such a concept existed in the seventh century. Without denying the pope's
good intentions which can be claimed in favor of any heresiarch of
history, it is quite obvious that his confession of one will, at a
crucial moment and as Sergius himself was somewhat backing out before the
objections of Sophronius, not only condoned the mistakes of others, but
actually coined a heretical formula, the beginning of a tragedy from which
the Church (including the orthodox successors of Honorius on the papal
throne) would suffer greatly (John Meyendorff, Imperial Unity and
Christian Division (Crestwood:St. Vladimir's, 1989), p. 353).Jaroslav
Pelikan affirms the same thing in these comments:In the controversy between
East and West...the case of Honorius served as proof to Photius that the
popes not only lacked authority over church councils, but were fallible in
matters of dogma; for Honorius had embraced the heresy of the
Monotheletes. The proponents of that heresy likewise cited the case of
Honorius, not in opposition to the authority of the pope but in support of
their own doctrine, urging that all teachers of the true faith had
confessed it, including Sergius, the bishop of New Rome, and Honorius, the
bishop of Old Rome (Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian Tradition: A History
of the Development of Doctrine (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1974),
Volume Two, pp. 150-151)Charles Hefele affirms the fact that Leo II also
condemned Honorius as a heretic and confirmed the decrees of the Council:It
is clear that Pope Leo II also anathematized Honorius...in a letter to the
Emperor, confirming the decrees of the sixth Ecumenical Council...in his
letter to the Spanish bishops...and in his letter to the Spanish King
Ervig (Charles Joseph Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church
(Edinburgh: Clark, 1896), Volume V, pp. 181-187).The condemnation by Pope
Leo II is significant. He affirmed the condemnation of Honorius as a
heretic, confirming by this that Honorius had actively undermined the
orthodox faith. W.J. Sparrow Simpson summarizes Leo's viewpoint in these
comments:Leo accepted the decisions of Constantinople. He has carefully
examined the Acts of the Council and found them in harmony with the
declarations of faith of his predecessor, Agatho, and of the Synod of the
Lateran. He anathematized all the heretics, including his predecessor,
Honorius, who so far from aiding the Apostolic See with the doctrine of
the Apostolic Tradition, attempted to subvert the faith by a profane
betrayal (W.J. Sparrow Simpson, Roman Catholic Opposition to Papal
Infallibility (London: John Murray, 1909), p. 35).It is significant that
the letter of Honorius to Sergius was used in the East by the proponents of
the Monothelite heresy as justification for their position. As Sparrow
Simpson observes: "This letter of Honorius was utilised in the East to
justify the Monothelite heresy the existence of one will in Christ (W.J.
Sparrow Simpson, Roman Catholic Opposition to Papal Infallibility (London:
John Murray, 1909), p. 33). The definition of what the Roman Catholic
Church refers to as ex cathedra teaching was not enunciated and defined
until 1870. One needs to keep this in mind when applying this test to the
case of Honorius and the judgment of the Sixth Ecumenical Council. In the
mind of this "infallible" Council the pope was a heretic. In its official
condemnation of him, he is judged on the basis of the criteria for ex
cathedra statements which was defined some 1200 years later. One simply
cannot avoid the historical facts. An "infallible" Ecumenical Council has
condemned an "infallible" pope, in his official capacity, for heresy. No
redefining of terms can erase the simple facts of history or the
implications of those facts for the dogma of papal infallibility. This has
direct bearing upon the issue of authority and jurisdiction. If an
Ecumenical Council can excommunicate a bishop of Rome then the ultimate
authority in the early Church was not the bishop of Rome but the Council.
The fact of this condemnation clearly demonstrates that contrary to the
claims of Vatican I, the early Church never viewed the bishops of Rome to
be infallible. No Church father has ever taught such a doctrine and it is
contradicted by the practice of the early Church fathers and Councils, III
Constantinople being but one example. See also our video "The Homosexual
Pope, Priests, Universalists, Evolutionists & Disunited Roman Catholic
Apologists" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hThonwrX6QU&index=2&list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715.
See our playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin
Mary" with 131 videos & counting at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715.
This is in response to a "Charismatic Catholic" who attacked our video
"Blasphemous Charismatic & Pentecostal Mayhem #2: A Hyped Circus, Sham
Unity, Charismatic Catholics" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-BWQeCkFfM&list=UUQ_EDvOtDAAWfCvGUhd6y3A &
said "I have seen miracles and healing all in Jesus name such as vision
restored & legs grew and have became even with the other leg." Vision &
longer leg problems are typical ploys used by so-called "healers." Why
don't these charismatic "healers" raise the dead & heal everyone at the
hospitals, especially in the terminally ill wards? Why don't these
charismatic "healers" heal the way Jesus healed in the Bible? Charismatic
"healings," especially at their money making "miracle healing crusades,"
have no basis in Biblical reality. Sorry but you have been deluded
by either equally deluded false prophets or intentionally deceitful
religious con men. To begin with Roman Catholics are not true Christians
since they believe a false gospel of salvation & thus are under God's curse
(Galatians 1:6-10, see an article on this by former RC priest for 22
years Richard Bennett at
//www.bereanbeacon.org/article/sorted/01_On_Catholicism/Are_Catholics_Christians.pdf).
Two items that come in handy in knowing about when Romanists argue that
anything said against the Roman "church" is not the truth is to tell them
about the following two items: 1. The following website is by self
proclaimed Roman Catholics following the so-called "true church" (in other
words their Roman church is their true savior not the Biblical Jesus
Christ) at //www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/. These Romanists destroy
the new Romanists since the invention of Vatican 2 in 1965. They present
great information proving modern Romanism & their popes (they call them
anti-popes) to be a false & apostate religion. It doesn't get much better
than this when one group of apostate Romanists attack another brand of
apostate Romanists in order to prove to the world they are false! 2. Our
video "The Homosexual Pope, Priests, Universalists, Evolutionists &
Disunited Roman Catholic Apologists" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hThonwrX6QU&list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715 proves
from Roman Catholic sources themselves that one of their popes was a
practicing homosexual, that almost 50% of Roman Catholic priests are
homosexuals (for more on this see our video "FORMER ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST
SAYS CHURCH OF ROME HAS A FALSE GOSPEL & WIDESPREAD HOMOSEXUALITY" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y4C-nBQ3mE), that the Roman church buys
the theory of evolution which denies the first eleven chapters of Genesis
in the Bible (see our playlist "Dealing with Darwin's Metaphysical
Evolution Religion" with 21 videos at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0703E78058346A52), that Pope John
Paul II kissed the Muslim Qur'an & said Islam has the same god as Roman
Catholics have (see the videos "Top Ten Reasons Muhammad Is Not a Prophet"
at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO8sZ1JyP1A, "Ten MORE Reasons Muhammad
Is Not a Prophet" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4p7HuuhF8k, "50
Reasons Muhammad Was Not a Prophet (in Under Five Minutes)" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Q3f15NXrLI, "David Wood: Five Reasons the
Quran Is Not the Word of God" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvlzlBov9zc,
"Who Killed Muhammad?" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6st_tFj6ouM,
"Why Did Muhammad Wear Women's Clothing?" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-50CraaniT0; also see
www.AnsweringMuslims.com & www.MuslimHope.com) & how Roman Catholic
apologists are at each others' throats because of the vast differences
within Romanism itself. Besides all that see the following websites for
detailed information on Romanism & how it is a counterfeit religion at
www.BereanBeacon.org, www.CWRC-RZ.org & //www.mtc.org/. Our playlist
"Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin Mary" currently has
122 videos refuting Romanism at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715. Remember Titus
1:9-16,
"9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be
able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.
10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they
of the circumcision:
11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things
which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.
12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, the Cretians are
alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be
sound in the faith;
14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn
from the truth.
15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and
unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being
abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.").
Next, what you thought were "healings" were not true Biblical healings at
all ("How to Fake a Healing" by Caroline Weerstra - "Pentecostals often
remain in Pentecostalism despite many misgivings for one simple reason:
the healings. They may admit that many of the practices and teachings are
unbiblical. They may confess that there is rampant abuse and
manipulation. But they shake off the doubts because they have seen so many
supernatural events--people stand up out of wheelchairs, back pain healed,
etc. And so they wonder, "If this is really so bad, why are so many people
being healed? Isn't it all worth it if sick people are being restored to
health?"
However, Pentecostal church services are all about showmanship and
appearance. It is surprisingly easy to fake healings, even to hold entire
healing services in which people appear to be 'healed' all over the church
and yet no one is really cured. How is this accomplished? The trick is
usually, as Miracle Max said in the quote above, to focus on problems which
can be resolved some way other than strictly supernaturally, to learn to
'heal' those who are only partly ill or can be made to seem well when they
are not.
Let's examine some of the most common 'healing' tricks in the Pentecostal
experience:
(a) Bigfoot Sightings. Perhaps the largest category of fake healings is
what I call "Bigfoot Sightings", because, like the mythical Bigfoot, all
that is known about these healings is that somebody else swears that they
saw them and that they are real.
Most often, it is the pastor or a visiting evangelist who relates stories
of healings that occurred somewhere else. When these 'healings' are
described in great detail to excited crowds, people tend to forget that
they never actually witnessed the event and have no reason to believe that
it actually occurred. In the retelling of the story, people often relate
the healing as though they witnessed it themselves. It is only upon
careful questioning that the truth emerges: nobody actually saw this one;
it was just a story told to the group by some convincing-sounding guy with
a microphone.
EXAMPLE: Evangelist/ missionary David Hogan often uses this technique.
Every time he speaks to groups, he claims to have raised 400+ people from
the dead and performed many amazing miracles. Although he relates
many incredible stories, he never actually performs miracles at his
meetings . . . he just talks about all the miracles that he supposedly
performed somewhere else.
Hogan's fans often describe him as a great man of God who heals the sick
and raises the dead. When directly asked, however, they admit that they
have never actually seen Hogan do any miracles. The only reason they have
to believe that Hogan has ever performed any miracles is that Hogan himself
claims that he has.
(b) "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!" Occasionally,
'healings' are fakes, plain and simple. Many evangelists believe that
seeing people apparently get healed raises the level of faith of the
parishioners and so opens the door for real healings. They use this as an
excuse to orchestrate healing shows that are planned in advance simply to
shock and amaze the crowd.
EXAMPLE: It is difficult to say how often this technique is used, because
evangelists who employ it are usually quite careful to cover their tracks.
However, occasionally, scandals open up that allow a glimpse inside such
misdealings. One of the best known examples of the intentional and
calculated use of fake healings involved cult leader Jim Jones. Jones
began his ill-fated career as a Pentecostal revivalist and healer. One of
his favorite techniques involved healing people of 'cancer' by apparently
removing chunks of foul-smelling material from their bodies that he claimed
were the cancerous tissues. People's Temple insiders later confessed that
the 'cancers' were actually rotten chicken livers, produced at the
appropriate time during the church service with a little slight-of-hand.
(c) MOSTLY disabled or ALL disabled? One of the most obvious and most
popular techniques used by faith healers is based upon a popular
misunderstanding of disabilities. When someone is in a wheelchair, people
tend to assume that the person cannot walk AT ALL. This is rarely the
case. Most people in wheelchairs can stand and even walk a little, just
not far and not well. Likewise, when a person is said to be blind or deaf,
people tend to assume that the person cannot see or hear AT ALL. Again,
this is rarely the case. Most blind people can see a little, just not very
well, and most people who are 'deaf' are really only partially deaf.
This explains why many 'miracles' that occur in faith-healing services
appear to be only partial healings. A healer may tell someone in a
wheelchair to stand and walk. The person shakily stands and limps
painfully across the stage. The crowd cheers, because they think that this
is amazing progress and that the person is on his or her way to a full
recovery. But, in fact, it may be no improvement at all. Likewise, many
healers will test a healing of a blind person by holding up a handkerchief
and asking the person to grab it. When the blind person is able to take
hold of the handkerchief, the crowd is amazed, not realizing that there is
nothing remarkable about a partly blind person being able to see a large
white object held only inches from his or her face.
EXAMPLE: This is one of the most common healing techniques and is used by
many, many faith healers. One of the best known examples is Peter Popoff,
who used a few trusted collegues to scout for healing candidates among the
crowds that came to his healing services. Popoff's scouts always asked
people in wheelchairs if they could walk a little or not at all. Any that
could walk a little were called up to the front for 'healing' during the
subsequent service. The technique was exposed by skeptic James Randi who
placed actors in the audience to claim that they had disabilities. Randi's
actors were interviewed by Popoff's scouts, and the information transmitted
to Popoff via a radio transmitter. Randi intercepted and recorded the
transmissions, which fed Popoff information on various audience members,
including which of them would make good 'healing' candidates.
(d) The Placebo Effect. Many so-called 'healings' are extremely
subjective. People are most often 'healed' of rather vague conditions that
are not visible, such as chronic back pain. A person who suffers from this
condition may get caught up in the excitement of the healing service and
may even experience a lesser degree of pain for a while, due to his or her
earnest desire to be healed which can, for a while, lead them to believe
that a healing has taken place. However, often the pain returns shortly
after the healing service ends.
EXAMPLE: The HBO documentary "Question of a Miracle" follows several
people who were supposedly healed by Benny Hinn. (As it turned out, none
of them actually were healed). One of these cases involved a man who
suffered from severe pain in his hip joints and needed surgical
intervention. The man claimed that during the healing service he was
totally healed and freed from pain. He even demonstrated this by doing
exercises on-stage at Hinn's direction--squatting, bending, etc, all while
claiming to feel no pain at all. However, the pain returned shortly after
the healing service ended, and the man still suffers the exact same
condition and still needs surgery.
(e) The Rain Dance. A surprising number of 'healings' are actually simply
a matter of people taking credit for natural events, as though they were
supernatural phenomena. I cannot even count the number of times I have
heard people claim to be healed of the common cold. And yet, recovering
from a cold is something that everyone does dozens of times in their
lifetime--there is nothing supernatural about a recovery (even a speedy
recovery) from such a condition. Similarly, many cancer 'healings' are
actually the result of extensive medical treatment that has resulted in
remission.
Sometimes health situations are somewhat more complex and yet just as
likely to result in spontaneous improvement or medically-assisted
recovery. Some heart conditions that occur in childhood usually do
spontaneously improve, some neurological or muscular conditions can make
sudden and remarkable improvement, especially with medical treatment and/or
physical therapy. But this is often overlooked by Pentecostal crowds eager
for a good healing story.
In all my years as a Pentecostal, as many healing stories as I heard, I
never heard of one case of someone being healed of Down Syndrome. In fact,
in my experience, Pentecostals never even pray for healing for someone with
Down Syndrome, and so, by avoiding these cases, they tacitly acknowledge
that they did not really think it likely that someone with a truly
PERMANENT condition would be "healed".
EXAMPLE: I used this technique many times myself. Specifically, I recall
giving testimony (at various times in my Pentecostal life) that I had been
healed of a sprained wrist, a headache, a backache, and several other
mundane conditions. In retrospect, I have to admit that these were faked.
Although I did not intend to fake, I wanted to see healings to badly that I
started claiming that every recovery was a 'healing'. For example, when I
suffered a very slight wrist sprain while roller skating, I prayed that God
would heal my wrist. When, the next morning, the wrist stopped hurting, I
claimed that it had been healed.
We do well to look at ALL Pentecostal and Charismatic healing claims
through highly skeptical eyes. Pentecostal and Charismatic leaders have a
compelling reason to lie and exaggerate their 'healing' claims: miracle
stories gather followers and increase financial support. Pentecostal and
Charismatic churches are full of desperate people who want to see miracles
and who are eager to believe every wild tale and to interpret every event
supernaturally.
Ask difficult questions. Demand difficult healings. If Benny Hinn, David
Hogan, or any other 'faith healer' can really call down the power of God to
heal a backache . . . well, they should be able to heal Down Syndrome,
regrow amputated limbs, etc. And let's not take their word for it . . .
let's have it on videotape so that everyone can see and marvel. If the
faith healers can't do this . . . well, it's time we ask ourselves
why." See also "Lying Charismatics and Healing Fraud" By David J. Stewart -
I've been reading a helpful book by Pastor Hugh F. Pyle exposing the
fake Charismatic healing frauds; such as Oral Roberts, Pat Robertson, Benny
Hinn and thousands of others. The title of the book is: The TRUTH about
TONGUES and the CHARISMATIC movement. The book is available from the Sword
of the Lord.
The following excerpt is taken from Chapter 15, titled, “Charismatics and
Healing” . . .
How genuine is the healing of the healers?
I am now looking at a letter written by Oral Roberts who says:
As I write these words, wave after wave of God's healing power is flooding
through me. My hands feel as if there is a supernatural heat in them; my
right hand is especially hot right now.
Oral goes on to describe his conversation with God—actually quoting the
words God says to him out loud. He declares that God told him to send each
prayer partner a swatch of new cloth with the imprint of Oral's hot hand
upon it, and they could place their hand on the imprint of Robert's hand
and actually feel his healing touch.
He then goes on to say that God told him to ask his prayer partners for
more money to finish his “City of Faith.” Then he goes on to feel great
sorrow for the finances of his “hurting” prayer partners who need a new
miracle; so it seems God told him to have his prayer partners each send him
$38 for one square foot of the project as a blessing pact covenant with
God. Oral assures his partners that he is “so anointed by God, I can hardly
write. Your swatch of new cloth is now ready.”
I'm sure great numbers of people got together the $38 to send in to get the
imprint of the hot hand of Oral Roberts.
Another time Roberts got his followers to donate more than $5 million for
cancer research since the evangelist told them he “had God's promise to
cure the disease.” This was well over five years ago. Oral got his $5
million, but we have not seen any more evidence of his promised cure for
cancer. Yet he told his gullible audience, “This is not Oral Roberts
talking, but the Spirit of God through him.”
One year earlier, Oral Roberts went to the Alhambra Community Hospital in
California for eye surgery. After building his multi-million dollar
hospital in Tulsa, one wonders why he went to California for his surgery.
Also why did a healer like Roberts, who trains and associates with other
healers, need surgery anyway?
The Bible says there were (and are) just “twelve apostles of the Lamb”
(Rev. 21:14). Yet Richard Roberts refers to his dad as an apostle, as do
others of his followers.
This can give rise to the divine “prophecies” he makes like the one stating
that God would “call him home” if he did not raise $8 million from his
subjects in 1987.
Mike Randall, writing in the Baptist Bible Tribune, stated that, if he did
not get the $8 million, it would be the first time ever recorded that God
killed one of His servants for not raising enough money!
Truly the “signs of an apostle” were done by the apostles (2nd Cor. 12:12),
not by the cheap imitations of the twentieth century.
Some years back “healing evangelist” A.A. Allen told his radio audience,
“If you are sick, if you have a cancer, it's because there is a sin in your
life. Get rid of your sin and you get rid of your cancer.” That same man
died in San Francisco, having gone there to be treated for an arthritic
knee. Yet the coroner reported that Allen died of acute alcoholism!
...The ecumenical Pentecostal David duPlessis, who was called “Mr.
Pentecost,” died of cancer of February of 1987. If the Charismatic healers
have the “hot hand” power they claim to have, why would they let “Mr.
Pentecost” die of cancer?
...Healers like Kuhlman, Coe, Allen, and duPlessis sicken and die. Bakker
and Roberts have to wear glasses. Tammy has her warts and hernia. Oral goes
to California for surgery. It would certainly appear that the best thing to
do is to obey the laws of good health, eat properly, have a check-up yearly
and trust the Lord.
Meanwhile, a return to Bible evangelism is in order. One day our “vile
body” will experience perfect healing when it is “fashioned like unto his
glorious body” for all those who are truly saved by His grace.
SOURCE: The TRUTH about TONGUES and the CHARISMATIC movement, by High F.
Pyle, pg. 127-130; Sword of the Lord Publishers; PO Box 1099, Murfreesboro,
TN, 37133; copyright 1989; ISBN: 0-87398-846-9
I also highly recommend Dr. John R. Rice's great book, THE CHARISMATIC
MOVEMENT. The Charismatic Movement can easily be proven fraudulent. I'm so
sick of hearing Charismatic cocky ministers (many who deny being
Charismatic, go figure), claim to have witnessed miraculous healings in
some remote location on earth, with no video cameras recording the event,
and you are expected to simply take them at their word. Well, I don't. They
are liars inspired by “the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that
now worketh in the children of disobedience” (Ephesians 2:2).
ALL faith healers get sick eventually and die (Romans 6:23). They need
surgery like everybody else who needs surgery. They wear glasses and have
hearing-aids like everybody else who needs them. Who's kidding who?
The Bible DOES teach divine healing; but it is the exception and not the
norm. Also, healing is never at the whim of some greedy televangelist who
sports healing as a cheap form of entertainment. God works in a still and
quiet manner, not in the spotlights by charlatans who exploit gullible
people out of their money.
In Pastor Max D. Younce's excellent book, I'M SO GLAD YOU ASKED!, he states:
God has allowed mankind to learn much about science and medicine. He has
given doctors for our benefit. God expects us to use the blessings of
medical knowledge He has given us. In James 5:14-16 we find the elders
anointed with oil (medicine) and prayed. That is what God wants us to do
today. Use the medicine and knowledge available, and bathe it with prayer.
God can and does step in, at His will; but it is not through the phony
“faith-healer” procedures that are so prevalent today. When God heals, He
heals completely and without charge! It is always right to appeal to the
“Great Physician.” He is always in!
“And the prayer of faith shall heal the sick, and THE LORD (if it is His
will) shall raise him up...”
SOURCE: Dr. Max D. Younce, I'M SO GLAD YOU ASKED!, Volume 2, pg. 225;
ISBN-13-978-0-9815225-8-6; Morris Publishing.
Sickness and physical suffering are a part of the sin-cursed world in which
we live. Our flesh is frail, weak and prone to all sorts of diseases and
problems as we age. Taking care of one's health is no guarantee of a long
and happy life. Health-crazed people drop dead all the time at the same age
as others who abuse their health with alcohol, lack of exercise and
cigarettes. Everything born is born dying.
Isaiah 53:5 Doesn't Guarantee Healing
Some false prophets pervert the Biblical meaning of Isaiah 53:5, “But he
was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the
chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are
healed.” Some dreamers claim that the phrase “with His stripes we are
healed” is a promise of physical healing in this earthly life. However,
that is NOT what this Scripture means at all. The Lord's work of redemption
made reconciliation with God possible by His blood (Ephesians 2:13).
We are made right with God by faith in the literal blood sacrifice of Jesus
Christ. We are healed from the curse of sin and the Law. There is NO
Biblical promise of divine physical healing while we are still in our
present fleshly bodies. Death and sickness are a part of life, and there's
nothing we can do about it except pray to God for healing and go to the
doctor. God gave us doctors, just as He gave us dentists and firemen and
automobile mechanics.
The Apostle Paul Left Trophimus Sick
Paul left his friend, Trophimus at Miletum... SICK!!! 2nd Timothy 4:20,
“Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus have I left at Miletum SICK.” The
mighty missionary, preacher, evangelist, and Christian man of God, the
Apostle Paul, left Trophimus SICK!!! There was no divine healing! It wasn't
God's will to heal Trophimus. Don't forget that. There has never been one
Charismatic preacher, who are nearly all arrogant and highminded, that has
emptied out a hospital of sick and ailing patients.
The following Scriptures teach us that only Jesus can do certain miracles.
John 15:24,25, “If I had not done among them the works which none other man
did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me
and my Father. But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled
that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.” Jesus proved
His deity by performing miracles, like healing amputees, that no other man
could do. If anyone could heal amputees today, the world would follow that
person as if God Himself.
Only Jesus, Who was God in the flesh upon the earth (1st Timothy 3:16; John
1:1-3, 10-14), had the power to do such miracles; and for a short time His
apostles to validate the Gospel message to the world of Jesus Christ
crucified and RISEN (John 16:33). By the completion of the Word of God with
the book of Revelation, all Apostolic powers had stopped. Again, Paul
couldn't even heal Trophimus, nor remove his own thorn in the flesh (2nd
Corinthians 12:8). In 2nd Timothy 4:11, Paul said that Luke, a medical
physician, was profitable for his ministry. Thank God for honest and
legitimate doctors.
The one big common denominator in the modern Charismatic Movement,
including TBN and The 700 Club is greed for more money. Legitimate Biblical
healing NEVER, and I mean never, pressures anyone for money, nor even asks.
God's power is not for sale as Simon the former Sorcerer learned the hard
way. Acts 8:20, “But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee,
because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with
money.” That's exactly the wickedness that Pat Robertson, his son, Gordon
and Terry Meeuwsen are committing when they ask for donations in return for
promises of financial prosperity and improved health.
They are selling the power of God, so-to-speak. The truth is that they have
no power of God. What they are doing is of the Devil, as greedy dogs,
exploiting people who are wearied, sick and emotionally hurting. 2nd Peter
2:3, “And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make
merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and
their damnation slumbereth not.” Their day is coming, just as everyone's
day of reckoning is coming, when they shall stand before God as their Judge
(Romans 12:19; Romans 14:12; 1st Thessalonians 4:6; 1st Corinthians 3:11-15;
2nd Corinthians 5:10-11; Revelation 20:11-15; 21:8).
Demonic entertainers today, like Criss Angel, have openly admitted that
they perform certain magicians tricks in a sinful attempt to disprove and
discredit the deity of Jesus Christ. Criss Angel has walked on water using
gimmicks, which many unbelievers have used to claim that Jesus was a fraud.
They had better hope they're correct, because life is short and Judgment
Day is coming if they're wrong.
Isaiah 56:11, “Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and
they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way,
every one for his gain, from his quarter.” See our playlist "Dealing with
Phony TV Preachers (TBN) & King James Onlyites" at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2CDA855486B09128. Titus 1:9-16
It has been properly pointed out that many of the early church fathers fell
into numerous heresies & in some cases damnable heresies because, after
all, they were not writers of inspired scripture. It is also a fact that
the further in time the early church got away from the original apostolic
age the more the apparent declension or deterioration of scriptural truth
is to be found in the writings of the early church writers (for documented
evidence of this please review the writings of early church historian &
scholar William Cunningham at
//www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?speakeronly=true&currsection=sermonsspeaker&keyword=William_Cunningham).
In fact, the sixteenth century Reformers looked like university
presidents compared to the early church fathers who seemed to be mere
school boys by contrast when it came to scriptural apostolic understanding
(although Martin Luther did suffer some from his heavy Romanist
indoctrination & tradition in some regards). Although the early church
fathers can be useful they cannot be put on the same level as the Word of
God itself (Psalm 138:2). If the early church fathers say anything that
contradicts what the apostolic writers have stated in scripture then any
anti scriptural teachings of the early church fathers must be rejected
completely (Isaiah 8:20, "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak
not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.") &
the warning of Peter remembered, 2 Peter 3:15-16, "And account that the
longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul
also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also
in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some
things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable
wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."
Water Baptism
Under the heading of salvation, it is important at this point to touch on
baptism. Although it may seem inconsistent to digress into what may be
considered an "ordinance" or "sacrament" of the church after indulging in
the metaphysical realities of being "in Christ" and being revealed as a son
of God, it is necessary since so many of the early church fathers equated
our regeneration with the act of immersion. The actual issue of baptismal
regeneration, however, we will only touch on at the end. Instead, we will
first investigate the apostolic practice, including what was considered
valid and the development of baptismal theology in the early church.
Baptism is perhaps the most universal of all Christian ordinances. It is
considered the "portal" into the Christian church by many branches of
Christianity. The early church fathers put a tremendous amount of emphasis
on baptism, which sparked a significant amount of debate. Other than the
controversies regarding the deity of Christ, the debates and controversies
that raged over baptism and rebaptism stand out as the most intense
theological debates of the third and fourth centuries. Some of the
questions that are still asked today are
:
a) Did the early church baptize infants?
b) Does baptism wash away "original sin"?
c) Is an individual regenerated (ie. "born-again") at baptism?
In the beginning of all of the gospels, we find how baptism was the central
facet of John the Baptist’s ministry. In Judaism, ritual washing was
already a practice, particularly with the Essenes and many ascetic groups,
but John’s baptism is distinguished as a "baptism unto repentance" (Mark
1:4; Luke 3:3; Acts 19:4). In this respect John represents the
personification of all of the prophets thus far. The highest moral teaching
of Judaism can be seen in the prophets in their emphasis of the heart
attitude that God seeks, rather than ritual observances (See Amos 5:21-23).
Yet even during John’s ministry, there was already a foreshadowing that the
pattern of water baptism served as a type for the spiritual baptism that
would be introduced by the Messiah. John says in Matthew’s gospel that he
baptized with water, but he that comes after me shall "baptize you with
fire and the Holy Spirit". For this reason, we should always keep before us
the truth that the water has no "magical" properties about it, nor can it
be considered an end itself.
Infant Baptism
It is a common practice among orthodox, Roman Catholic, as well as several
Protestant bodies (ie. Lutheran, Covenant, etc.) to baptize individuals
when they are infants. The practice is frequently justified on the grounds
that, under the Mosaic economy of salvation, God's covenant was extended to
even infants through circumcision, which was to be performed on the eighth
day after birth. The covenant of circumcision is said to be a type or
foreshadowing of baptism, which serves a similar function under the New
Covenant. This reasoning appears in the church documents Apostolic
Constitutions (ca. 4th Century)
"Do not delay to turn to the Lord, for thou knowest not what the day will
bring forth." Do you also baptize your infants, and bring them up in the
nurture and admonition of the Lord. For He says "Suffer the little children
to come unto me, and forbid them not." (VII:457)
as well as Cyprian (V:353)
For this reason we think that no one should be hindered from obtaining the
grace under the law that was already ordained, and that spiritual
circumcision ought not be hindered... and nobody is hindered from baptism
and grace how much more should we not hinder an infant, who being lately
born, has not sinned, except in being born after the flesh in the nature of
Adam.
Furthermore, the waters of baptism were thought by many to have a
"medicinal" property, and that the water itself was effectual in affecting
a rebirth of the spirit of an individual, and they would be regenerated in
the act of baptism itself.
Are we then to expect that this was the apostolic practice, observed by the
apostles and their successors in the apostolic churches? Although the
previously mentioned texts demonstrate a belief in an objective and
effectual power resident in the waters of baptism, there is even more
evidence that would denote the contrary. It can be sufficiently shown that
the earliest apostolic teaching on baptism did not make provisions for
infants. The primary reason is because faith is an integral element of
salvation. Whether one believes in baptismal regeneration or not, it is
undeniable that personal faith is the active agent in applying the benefits
of Calvary to our lives. Baptism is an ordinance that is entered into only
when an individual has made the decision to fully believe in Jesus Christ.
We see in the Bible when the apostle Philip was to baptize the Ethiopian
eunuch whom he had converted, the eunuch asked
"What is to prevent me from being baptized?" Philip answered
"If you believe with your whole heart, it is permissible." (Acts 8:36,37)
It is interesting that the critical part of verse 37, which clearly implies
that one must fully believe in Jesus before being baptized, is missing from
many contemporary translations, even though it is found in the majority of
original Greek manuscripts. The best evidence for the authenticity of the
verse lies in the fact that it is quoted by Scripture by Irenaeus ( Against
Heresies XI, 8), and Cyprian (Treatise IX, 2, 43), many, many years before
the oldest manuscripts which do not include it were ever written. This fact
establishes without question the principle that, according to scripture and
church tradition, personal faith is a prerequisite to baptism.
Looking through the rest of the New Testament, there are no clear examples
of infants being baptized. The inference is that they were not, since such
stress in put on repentance, faith and confession of the Lordship of Christ
as being intrinsic to the New Birth. Most baptismal texts found in the
Patristic church likewise infer that those being baptized are at least old
enough to enter into baptism of their own volition. Consider some of the
texts from the early church regarding baptism.
Didache (ca. 100 A.D.):
But before the baptism, let the baptizer fast, and also the baptized, and
what ever others can; but thou shall order the baptized to fast one or two
days before.
Justin Martyr (First Apology; ca 155 A.D.)
As many are persuaded and believe that what we teach and say is true, and
undertake to live accordingly, are instructed to entreat God with
fasting...then they are brought by us where there is water, and are
regenerated in the same manner in which we ourselves were...For Christ also
said :"'Unless you be born-again, you cannot see the kingdom of God".
Tertullian (On Baptism)
They who are about to enter baptism ought to pray with repeated prayer,
fasts, and bendings of the knee, and vigils all the night through, and with
the confession of all bygone sins, that they may express the meaning of the
baptism of John.
Virtually every text from the first two hundred years of Christianity that
deal with baptism mention the obligation on the part of those being
baptized to be spiritually prepared, usually by repentance and faith, and
extended periods of prayer and fasting. This would preclude any possibility
of baptism being applicable to infants. Any reference to infants being
baptized is conspicuously missing. The whole matter is decisively answered
by one text from Tertullian.
Tertullian:(On Baptism-III:678)
"Unless a man be reborn of water and spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of
heaven" has tied to faith the necessity of baptism. Accordingly, all
thereafter who became believers used to be baptized...and so according to
the disposition, circumstances and even the age of each individual, the
delay of baptism is preferable, principally, in the case of little
children....For the Lord does indeed say "Forbid them not to come to me".
Let them come, then, while they are growing up. Let them come while they
are learning; while they learn whither to come; let them become Christians
when they have become able to know Christ. Why does the innocent period in
life hasten to the "remission of sins"? ..Let them know how to "ask" for
salvation, that it may seem to have given "to him that asketh". .
If this is indeed the unanimous consent of the church, how did it happen
that infant baptism became the norm? Although the answer may be somewhat
speculative, we need to look to one of the baptismal texts from Irenaeus.
Irenaeus, who held to the orthodox position regarding when one should be
baptized, wrote a text which supported the common perception that we are
born-again when we are baptized. He said in Against Heresies in 180 A.D.
We are lepers in sin, we are made clean by means of the sacred water and
invocation of the Lord, from our old transgression; being spiritually
regenerate as new born babes, even as the Lord has declared "except a man
be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter the kingdom
of heaven.
Years later, we see some Christian writings taking Irenaeus' words and
interpreting "spiritually regenerate, as newborn babes" as meaning that we
are baptized as new-born babes! In the proper historical and textual
context however, this is inconceivable. Thus, sometime in the mid 3rd
century and in contradiction to the norm, the practice of baptizing infants
started, built largely on a misinterpretation of Irenaeus.
Baptism and Original Sin
One of the most common arguments in favor of the necessity of infant
baptism involves the question of original sin. The Roman church today, for
example, views baptism as the means that an individual is cleansed from
guilt incurred in the original sin of Adam and Eve. It is thought that the
effectiveness of the baptism is in no way dependent upon the recipient of
the sacrament. Therefore, it was considered expedient to baptize someone as
soon as possible, namely, right after their birth.
This is quite different from the biblical teaching, which is that baptism
is the symbolic ordinance that typifies our identification with the burial
and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is a death to our old life, and the
beginning of our new life in Christ. Rather than baptizing immediately
after birth, it was actually more common to wait late until the twilight of
one's years to be baptized. The rationale for this was that baptism was
thought by many to be a one shot deal at forgiveness and pardon, so a late
baptism would minimize the opportunity for an individual to accrue any
damning sins. Even in the Fourth century this mindset was prevalent,
witnessed by the fact that Constantine himself would not be baptized until
he was on his deathbed. The earliest archeological evidence we have that a
child was baptized comes from an epitaph on a young boys tomb in the
Lateran. The quote is from the fourth century and it reads:
Florentius set up this inscription for his well deserving son
Appronianus, who lived one year, nine months and five days.
Since he was truly beloved by his grandmother, and she saw that
he was destined for death, she asked of the church that he might
depart a believer.
Many who have pointed to this as evidence for infant baptism have missed
the point of the epitaph altogether. It does not support the idea that
infants were baptized. On the contrary. The boy was almost two, not yet
baptized, and when it was apparent that he was not going to survive to a
mature age, the grandmother made a special request (presumably to baptize
him) before his death. This epitaph actually supports the view that infants
were not baptized as a normal procedure at that point in church history,
and that putting off the practice until later in life was still the most
common opinion.
If it is true that infants were not baptized, then what about the
understanding of original sin? What did happen to a child or an infant that
was not baptized? Were they damned because of Adam’s guilt? Again, looking
closer at the earliest documents, we find that the early church had a
vastly different perception of Adam's sin and it's effects.
Shepherd of Hermas (ca. 150 A.D)
They are as infant children in whose hearts no evil originates; nor did
they know what wickedness is, but always remain as children. Such
accordingly without doubt, dwell in the kingdom of God, because they
defiled in nothing the commandments of God. ...all infants are honorable
before God, and are first in persons with Him.
The Shepherd of Hermas, previously noted, was considered canonical by
several fathers of the church. According to him, there is no evil in the
heart of an infant, and they dwell in the kingdom of God. Below we have a
statement by Justin scolding the Roman dignitaries for allowing their pagan
priests to sacrifice children from the womb for the purpose of divination.
Justin Martyr, First Apology XVIII, 155 A.D)
For you let even necromancy, and the divinations, whom you practice on
immaculate children, and the invoking of departed human souls.
Notice that he calls the children "immaculate". Tertullian apparently held
the same regard for infant children.
Tertullian, Treatise on the Soul, 204 AD
those abodes; if you mean the good why should you judge to be unworthy of
such a resting-place the souls of infants and of virgins, and those which,
by reason of their condition in life were pure and innocent?
In the previously noted text from Tertullian’s On Baptism, he likewise
referred to unbaptized infants as "innocent". In addition to these, we have
a frequently cited text from the Apocalypse of Peter from the 2nd century,
that is quoted by Clement of Alexandria, Theodotus and others, that states
emphatically that aborted children are immediately ushered by a guardian
angel into paradise, and share in a "better fate". It is understood by
these fathers that Adam’s guilt did not extend to one who had not sinned.
If it did, then we would all need to concede that every aborted child,
miscarriage, stillborn child, or otherwise unbaptized infant that died was
in hell. Such an idea would be abhorrent to the early church.
The issue is understood biblically in Romans 5:12 which states that "sin
entered the world through one man (Adam), and death through sin, and in
this way death came to all men for all have sinned". Notice that the actual
agent of death to each individual is that individual’s personal sin.
Likewise the next verse states that sin is not imputed where there is no
law, that is, no understanding of right and wrong, which surely would be
the case with an infant. It must be noted, however, that it would be
equally wrong to propose that the descendants of Adam were unaffected by
his actions. Man was qualitatively changed, now having the potential to
know good and evil. Apparently his will was crippled and frustrated from
being able to "do as he ought". (Romans 7:12-24) God, by his own
sovereignty, has decreed that all man are bound over to disobedience
(Romans 11:32; Galatians 3:22). The operation of sin in our lives, likened
to a conception and gestational period in the book of James, "brings forth
death ( James 1:14-15). To summarize the issue, then, we could fairly say
that the early church taught that infants are guilt free, yet, the due to
the fall we know that no natural mortal, upon being able to distinguish
right from wrong, can stay guilt free, but instead is prone to sin.
When Cyprian of Carthage started promoting infant baptism as a cure from
Adam’s sin. He immediately had to defend it against the charge of novelty.
As shown, it was not the church’s understanding that infants were in need
of cleansing from sin. At the time, however, no major theological
counter-thesis was offered. It was not until Pelegius started preaching in
the early 5th century that the orthodox church was forced to define the
doctrine of "Original Sin". Pelegius, who up to this point had been an
orthodox bishop and writer, propounded that Adam’s sin had absolutely no
effect on his offspring, and that every individual had the potential to
live a perfect and holy life. Pelegius asserted that man was by nature
good, and could, by his own will and accord, live pleasingly before God.
This extreme position, threatened the very necessity for the sacrifice and
atonement of Christ. If justification was by the law, then Christ died in
vain (Galatians 2:21). St. Augustine, through a number of polemical
writings and Councils, refuted and condemned the teaching of Pelegius.
Unfortunately, as is with many conflicts of ideas and words throughout
history, the rhetoric and polemic overstated the orthodox position. In
order to counter the inherent goodness of all, as taught by Pelegius,
Augustine championed the inherent depravity of all, including infants. As a
result, he held to the position that all infants are in a state of
damnation before God, not because of their sin, but Adam’s. According to
Augustine, unbaptized infants go to suffer in hell. Some Roman Catholic
theologians have attempted to soften this somewhat, hypothesizing a place
called "limbo" which is more humane then hell, so as to deflect the obvious
charge of injustice that would come with consigning newborn babies to
eternal torment. This has never been officially defined by the Roman
church, however. The Augustinian concept of Original Sin, then, must be
rejected as a departure from the apostolic rule of faith.
Another viewpoint of infant baptism is one which equates the baptismal act
with the sign and seal of the New Covenant, akin to circumcision of the Old
Covenant. Some of the later texts which support infant baptism suggest that
the baptism should be done on the eighth day, as was the circumcision of
the Old Covenant. It must be kept in mind, however, that the New Testament
frequently mentions circumcision, but never as a type for baptism. Instead,
it says "neither circumcision nor uncircumscision means anything, but what
counts is a new creation" (Galatians 6:15) which subordinates any "sign or
seal" of a covenant to the spiritual reality of being born-again by trust
in Christ. Likewise, Paul also points out that even Abraham was justified
by believing God, before and independently of the sign of circumcision.
(Romans 4:9-11). Consequently, since the New Testament minimizes the
alleged typology of circumcision, it is not likely that we would find any
apostolic teaching that would equate baptism with the same function of
sealing an individual into God’s New Covenant. Instead, we find that both
circumcision and baptism both serve as types for the spiritual reality of
putting off our flesh and being washed of the impurities of the old nature.
The spiritual reality, of course, is most applicable to an adult.
Baptismal Regeneration
The belief in baptismal regeneration was apparently held by the majority of
the early church fathers. Although one could debate writer by writer
through the first few centuries as to whether this was indeed an apostolic
teaching, in brief, the larger question would be as to whether an
individual is saved (regenerated) by faith alone or by faith and baptism.
The answer to that question is simply found by examining the scriptures to
see whether salvation is imputed to those who believe and are baptized, or
to those who merely believe. If the baptismal waters are indeed necessary
for salvation, as even some writers proposed, then we should not find any
cases in scripture where individuals are "saved" apart from baptism. There
are, of course several glaring examples. The thief on the cross (Luke 23:40-43),
as well as those in the household of Cornelius who believed and were filled
with the Holy Spirit before they were baptized with water (Acts 10:43-48)
are two clear examples. There are also numerous examples of Paul’s
missionary endeavors, where he preaches and many believe, yet there is no
reference to water baptism. With this being the case, we must conclude that
water baptism cannot be equally an agent to salvation, since there are
cases of individuals being saved by faith apart from the waters of baptism.
Neither can the act of baptism carry salvific power in and of it’s self,
since there are scriptural examples of individuals receiving baptism at the
hand of the apostles, yet that individual still declared to be perishing
because there heart was not right with God (cf. The Story of Simon Magus,
Acts 8:9-24). Why then did so many early church fathers attribute
regeneration at the point of water baptism? We could speculate that the
hostile anti-Christian culture may have had a role to play. In the early
church, baptism was the public profession before all that the individual
was joining themselves to the Christian community. They were declaring that
they were dead to their old life of idolatry and paganism. For many, it was
the act that destined them to a martyr’s fate. Culturally, there was also
the de-emphasis of such rites with many of the Gnostics. Those Gnostics
that did have a baptismal ritual (Sethians and Valentians) had it so
"super-spiritualized" that it would be construed by many to be a polemic
against the normal, orthodox baptismal practice. We would consequently
expect an increased emphasis on the act of baptism itself, certainly far
more than our culture would remit. It could also be that the significance
of water baptism is not derived so much from the agency of the water, but
from the agency of faith and public profession of the Lordship of Christ.
"If you confess me before men, I will confess you before my heavenly
Father" (Matthew 10:32). In any respect, I would deduce that the emphasis
on the ritual of baptism with respect to regeneration by the fathers was
more a product of these cultural forces than actual apostolic teaching.
In summary of the issue, we can see that the post-apostolic church may have
had a deeper
awareness of the mechanics of salvation, without the burdens of some of
today's debates. This is not to say that everyone in the first three
centuries understood the magnitude and glorious liberty of salvation in
Christ. On the contrary; salvation by faith was one of, if not, the first
foundational tenet to fall prey to the apostasy. Very early in the third
century, because of the necessity of bearing up under persecution, we can
see references to good works (ie. public profession) being necessary for
salvation. By the middle of the third century, the regeneration of the
believer was ascribed most commonly to happen at baptism. Ultimately, as
the Roman Empire broke apart in the fifth century, and the church assumed
the role of maintaining order in that civilization, eternal salvation was
joined to the reception of the sacraments. Later in western history, this
would give the papacy exceptional control over the princes, barons and
kings throughout Europe. If a certain ruler would not side with the demands
of the Pope, the Pope could vow to withhold the sacraments from that ruler
and his subjects. Although that might not have struck fear into the ruler,
the prospect of eternal damnation for an entire duchy or kingdom would
create a panic and terror among the masses, and the ruler's hand would be
forced to reconcile with the Pope.
Today there is need to renew the original apostolic understanding of
salvation. The gospel message, as typified by the Pauline revelation of
grace, righteousness and adoption, is forever coupled to the truths borne
by the act of baptism, that of self-abandonment and death to the old life,
so as to fully serve God in the newness of life. So many have tried to
reinterpret the gospels as merely a means to the end of raising one’s
self-esteem, or instilling dignity and human worth. For others, it is a
"feel good" message, brimming with warm snugglies of how much God loves us.
All though there is truth in both views, we cheat ourselves of the fullness
of our common salvation when we see it as less than a total redemption, of
the total man, to be fully adopted into Gods’ family as a true child of
God. Likewise, we cheat God when we respond with anything less than laying
down every aspect of our old life and being, in complete service to God,
for His glory alone. For more on the issue of water baptism see our videos:
"IS WATER BAPTISM NECESSARY TO ESCAPE HELL & BE SAVED & ARE YOU "BORN
AGAIN" (JOHN 3:3-8) BY IT?" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYJtMV9qrWg &
"THE EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN ROMANCE WITH APOSTATE ROMAN CATHOLICISM (PART
1): WATER BAPTISM SALVATION?" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XobZCIzK-Zo. See our website
www.BibleQuery.org & the article posted there called "Water Baptism Not
Essential for Salvation." See also our newsletter posted there called
"Church of Christ." The following link concerning water baptism is very
useful at //www.gotquestions.org/baptism-salvation.html. 2 Timothy 2:15
Water Baptism is not a savior (Christ alone is) or is it the true gospel
(Galatians 1:6-9). Water Baptism — Is it Necessary for Salvation?
Definitely NOT! See our video "IS WATER BAPTISM NECESSARY TO ESCAPE HELL &
BE SAVED & ARE YOU "BORN AGAIN" (JOHN 3:3-8) BY IT?" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYJtMV9qrWg&list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715&index=70.
Let’s show how Scripture differentiates between the baptism of John and the
baptism of Jesus. We’ll look at Acts 19:3-5. Here are these verses:
And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?” So they said,
“Into John’s baptism.” Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism
of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who
would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.” When they heard this, they
were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Acts 19:3-5 (NKJ)
If John’s baptism was the same as Jesus’ baptism, then why did these people
need to be re-baptized? The answer is obvious. John’s baptism was not the
same as Jesus’ baptism.
Now, let’s talk about some Scriptures that people might use to defend their
position that water baptism is indeed necessary for salvation and respond
to those verses. Let’s look at Mark 1:4. It says:
John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a baptism of repentance
for the remission of sins.
Mark 1:4 (NKJ)
This verse seems to say that the baptism of repentance was for the
remission of sins. Who am I to argue with Scripture? But as we’ve discussed
already, John’s baptism IS NOT THE SAME as the baptism of Jesus. So we can
discount the baptism of John for our purposes, because we are baptized in
the name of Jesus, not in the name of John. It is Jesus’ baptism that is
for us today, not John’s. If we’re supposed to be baptized into John’s
baptism, then why were the people in Acts 19:3-5 re-baptized? The answer is
plain. Because once Jesus had come on the scene, it was HIS baptism that is
relevant. So for us to decide what we need to do, in this present age, we
need to focus on the baptism of Jesus.
Here’s a set of verses that people use to defend the idea that water
baptism is necessary for salvation. They are John 3:1-8. Let’s look at
these verses.
1)There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews.
2)This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You
are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do
unless God is with him.” 3)Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly,
I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
4)Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he
enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” 5)Jesus answered,
“Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit,
he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6)That which is born of the flesh is
flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7)Do not marvel that
I said to you, “You must be born again.’ 8)The wind blows where it wishes,
and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where
it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”
John 3:1-8 (NKJ)
People taking the stance that baptism is necessary for salvation will say,
“See, look here! This verse says that ‘unless one is born of water and the
Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.'” And I must agree that is does
say that. But what does “born of water” mean? It this phrase referring to
water baptism? Upon first glance, it may seem so, but let’s take a closer
look at the surrounding context. Read the entire passage again, starting
from verse 1. Nicodemus is asking Jesus how he can possibly enter his
mother’s womb again and be re-born. So he’s talking about physical birth.
He can’t understand the concept of physically being re-born. Obviously
that’s an impossibility. But Jesus isn’t talking about physical rebirth,
He’s talking about spiritual rebirth. Look at what He says in verses 5 and
6. I’ll repeat it.
“Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit,
he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is
flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.”
John 3:5,6 (NKJ)
You see? So “born of water” in this context looks to mean “physically born”
not “baptized.” Let me re-phrase it. “I’m telling you that unless you’re
physically born and then spiritually reborn, you can’t enter into heaven.
If you’re physically born, you’re just a lost human. If you’re spiritually
reborn, you’ve entered into a relationship with Jesus Christ.” (Eric’s
version)
Let’s look at yet another common verse used to defend the idea that the
salvation of our souls requires water baptism. Here it is:
Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in
the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive
the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 2:38 (NKJ)
Obviously, the controversial phrase here is after the word “repent.” We all
agree that repentance is necessary for salvation. Let’s look at the Greek
word εις translated “for.” In the original Greek, in the New Testament,
this word has several different meanings. One is “aim or purpose.” An
example of εις being used in this manner is I Corinthians 2:7, which says
No, we speak of God’s secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that
God destined for (the aim or purpose of) our glory before time began.
I Corinthians 2:7 (NKJ)
In another usage, the Greek word εις means “at,” or “because of” as in
Matthew 12:41. Let’s look at it:
The men of Nineveh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and
condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and indeed a
greater than Jonah is here.
Matthew 12:41 (NKJ)
Both of these uses are good Greek, and so the next logical question would
be “what drives your choice of translation?” For me, it is the larger
context of Scripture. For instance, in Acts 10, we see that people had
already been saved before being baptized. Let’s look:
46)For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter
answered, 47)”Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized
who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” 48)And he commanded
them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a
few days.
Acts 10:46-48 (NKJ)
These people were speaking in tongues and had received the Holy Spirit yet
they had not been baptized. Another example is the thief on the cross who
went to Paradise without baptism. Let’s read about that.
39)Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, “If
You are the Christ, save Yourself and us.” 40)But the other, answering,
rebuked him, saying, “Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the
same condemnation? 41)And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward
of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong.” 42)Then he said to
Jesus, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.” 43)And Jesus
said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in
Paradise.”
Luke 23:39-42 (NKJ)
Clearly this man was never baptized. Yet he was saved because he believed.
What did Paul tell the Philippian jailor? Let’s find out.
25)But at midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God,
and the prisoners were listening to them. 26)Suddenly there was a great
earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison were shaken; and
immediately all the doors were opened and everyone’s chains were loosed.
27)And the keeper of the prison, awaking from sleep and seeing the prison
doors open, supposing the prisoners had fled, drew his sword and was about
to kill himself. 28)But Paul called with a loud voice, saying, “Do yourself
no harm, for we are all here.” 29)Then he called for a light, ran in, and
fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. 30)And he brought them out and
said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” 31)So they said, “Believe on the
Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”
Acts 16:25-31 (NKJ)
Although the jailor’s family was baptized, they were saved when they
believed. Paul plainly set forth only belief as a prerequisite for
salvation.Further, in establishing the greater context of Scripture, we can
look at numerous other passages where belief is the only requirement for
salvation.
Those by the wayside are the ones who hear; then the devil comes and takes
away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.
Luke 8:12 (NKJ)
But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children
of God, to those who believe in His name.
John 1:12 (NKJ)
15). . .that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal
life. 16)For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son,
that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
17)For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but
that the world through Him might be saved. 18)”He who believes in Him is
not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he
has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
John 3:15-18 (NKJ)
He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not
believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”
John 3:36 (NKJ)
“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who
sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has
passed from death into life.”
John 5:24 (NKJ)
And Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall
never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst.”
John 6:35 (NKJ)
. . . “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.”
John 6:40 (NKJ)
”Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life.”
John 6:47 (NKJ)
”Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not
believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”
John 8:24 (NKJ)
Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in
Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me
shall never die. Do you believe this?”
John 11:25,26 (NKJ)
Jesus said to her, “Did I not say to you that if you would believe you
would see the glory of God?”
John 11:40 (NKJ)
. . . but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ,
the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.
John 20:31 (NKJ)
”To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes
in Him will receive remission of sins.”
Acts 10:43 (NKJ)
This is Peter speaking. After he spoke these words, many people believed
and they were baptized with the Holy Spirit and began speaking in tongues.
After that, they were then baptized. This shows that the belief saved the
people (would unsaved people have the Holy Spirit and be speaking in
tongues?) and then afterward, they were baptized.
. . .and by Him everyone who believes is justified from all things from
which you could not be justified by the law of Moses.
Acts 13:39 (NKJ)
Now when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of
the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.
Acts 13:48 (NKJ)
”But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be
saved in the same manner as they.”
Acts 15:11 (NKJ)
So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you
and your household.”
Acts 16:31 (NKJ)
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to
salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the
Greek.
Romans 1:16 (NKJ)
9) . . .that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in
your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10)For
with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth
confession is made unto salvation. 11)For the Scripture says, “Whoever
believes on Him will not be put to shame.” 12)For there is no distinction
between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call
upon Him. 13)For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.”
Romans 10:9-13 (NKJ)
For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God,
it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save
those who believe.
I Corinthians 1:21 (NKJ)
. . . knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by
faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might
be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the
works of the law no flesh shall be justified.
Galatians 2:16 (NKJ)
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves;
it is the gift of God.
Ephesians 2:8 (NKJ)
For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring
with Him those who sleep in Jesus.
I Thessalonians 4:14 (NKJ)
. . . that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had
pleasure in unrighteousness.
II Thessalonians 2:12 (NKJ)
However, for this reason I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ
might show all longsuffering, as a pattern to those who are going to
believe on Him for everlasting life.
I Timothy 1:16 (NKJ)
For we who have believed do enter that rest, as He has said: “So I swore in
My wrath, “They shall not enter My rest,”‘ although the works were finished
from the foundation of the world.
Hebrews 4:3 (NKJ)
But we are not of those who draw back to perdition, but of those who
believe to the saving of the soul.
Hebrews 10:39 (NKJ)
Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture, “Behold, I lay in Zion A
chief cornerstone, elect, precious, And he who believes on Him will by no
means be put to shame.”
I Peter 2:6 (NKJ)
Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who
loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him.
I John 5:1 (NKJ)
These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of
God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may
continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.
I John 5:13 (NKJ)
These verses would be grossly misleading if baptism were a prerequisite for
salvation! I’ve just listed a plethora of verses that tell us that we are
saved if we believe, and are condemned if we don’t. This should help the
questioner get a better idea of the context of Scripture regarding baptism,
and, for that matter, what one needs to do for salvation (hint: believe).
For more on this subject, check out I Corinithians 15:1-11, and read the
whole book of John.
So, if you remember, we were discussing Acts 2:38, and I think the better
translation of the Greek word εις is “because of” in this verse due to the
greater context of Scripture. Scripture teaches baptism on the basis of
repentance, and belief as the requirement for salvation.In addition, this
verse presents us with a logic problem. Let me explain. If I were to say,
“Eat and put gold under your bed, and you can live,” that would be a true
statement. But the part that really allows you to live is the “eat” part.
Putting gold under your bed may help you in your finances, but it doesn’t
actually cause you to continue living. Eating does! The same logical
argument can be used for this verse. Peter says, “Repent, and let every one
of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins;
and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” Now, we know that if we
repent and are baptized, we will be saved, according to this verse. But it
doesn’t logically follow that both repentance and baptism are requirements
for salvation, following the logic outlined above. And in the larger
context of Scripture, we see that baptism is NOT a prerequisite for eternal
life.
Another verse used to defend the position that water baptism is necessary
for salvation is I Peter 3:21. Here is the verse (in its context).
18)For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that
He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by
the Spirit, 19)by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison,
20)who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited
in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that
is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21)There is also an antitype
which now saves us–baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but
the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of
Jesus Christ, 22)who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God,
angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.
I Peter 3:18-22 (NKJ)
Granted, this is a very difficult passage, and I make no claim to
thoroughly understand it. However, I want to focus in on verses 20 and 21.
We see here that Peter is comparing baptism to the time when Noah and his
family were saved on the ark. And then Peter tells us that baptism saves
us. But he’s quick to point out, in the very next phrase, that this baptism
saves us symbolically, not actually. He’s saying that baptism doesn’t
cleanse us physically in a literal sense, or if you want to take it
metaphorically, it doesn’t cleanse our souls in a literal sense. But what
saves us is the “answer (or inquiry) of a good conscience toward God.” This
is the baptism which saves us. Peter tells us that baptism saves us, and
then he goes on to define baptism as an inquiry of a good conscience toward
God, or in other words, an open, honest inquiry and trust in our Lord and
Savior, Jesus Christ. It’s not the act of immersion which saves our souls,
it’s our trust in Jesus.
Yet another verse that often seems to promote baptism as a requirement for
salvation is Mark 16:16. Here it is:
He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe
will be condemned.
Mark 16:16 (NKJ)
This verse also presents a logical question. It’s the same logic problem
discussed above for Acts 2:38. Simply put, this verse in no way says that
both belief and baptism are requirements for salvation. In addition, the
second portion of this verse makes this quite clear without any external
argument. It says, “he who does not believe will be condemned.” It does NOT
say, “he who does not believe and is not baptized will be condemned.” It
plainly sets forth the “believing” aspect of the statement as the
requirement for avoiding condemnation.
In summation, I’d like to make some additional points. First, baptism is
never given in Scripture as a COMMAND to Christians except in Acts 2:38
when Peter tells the Jews to “repent and be baptized.” This is the ONLY
place where we are commanded to be baptized. So since we are told to, we
should be. Yet this should never be construed as a command to all new
Christians as a requirement for salvation. The New Testament makes this
blatantly clear. What would happen if I were on the battlefield and I
accepted Jesus and then was shot through the heart before I was baptized?
As Scripture so plainly states, I would be saved, just as the people were
in Acts 10 who received the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues before they
were baptized, and just as the thief on the cross was before he died (he
was never baptized).
In addition, why did Paul tell his readers in such certain terms that he
wasn’t called to baptize, but to preach? Look at this verse:
I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest
anone should say that I had baptized in my own name. Yes I also baptized
the household of Stephanus. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any
other. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not
with wisdom and words, lest the cross of Christ be made of no effect.
I Corinthians 1:13-17
Paul tells us that Jesus didn’t call him to baptize (is Paul negating the
Great Commission here? I think not!) but to preach. And Paul says he only
baptized a few people. And thank goodness for that, he says, because
otherwise people might be saying they were baptized in the name of Paul.
The Great Commission is in Matthew 28:19,20 records Jesus’ words to his
disciples to “go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in
the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit . . .” This
certainly doesn’t say we need to be baptized to be saved. And why did Paul
say he wasn’t called to baptize? It must be because the church as a whole
is called to baptize, not us as individuals. How could a wheelchair-bound
person baptize someone? Yet we have many Christians who are in wheelchairs.
And we have many Christians who are invalids as well. Are they disobeying
Jesus’ command to baptize? I don’t think so. Jesus Himself baptized none.
And then the kicker . . . why would Paul leave 99% of his converts
half-saved, or, according to some, not saved at all? If baptism were a
requirement for salvation, then the majority of people Paul preached to
never entered the kingdom of heaven, because, as Paul says himself, he only
baptized Crispus, Gaius, and the household of Stephanus. Paul, in his
zealousnous for preaching the gospel, and in his obsession for detail,
would not leave so many people unsaved.
My hope is that this study has given you a glimpse of the truth of our
great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. He lives today. Believe in Him, and in
His words, and you will receive eternal life. That’s a promise we can all
bank on. John 14:6 (it's Jesus, not water baptism)!
“Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said
unto them, Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you,
will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.” —Luke 13:23-24 Do you
understand the question in the above Scripture? “Lord, are there few that
be saved?” Someone came to Jesus and wanted to know if “few” people were
saved. It's interesting that the person didn't ask if “many” people were
saved. Evidently the person had been listening to Jesus' preaching and
became convinced that few people were really saved. When the Bible speaks
of being “saved,” it means saved from God's wrath upon Christ-rejecting
sinners in Hell (for more on hell see our playlist "Dealing with Hell, Lake
of Fire, Unpopular Bible Doctrines" with 30 videos at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE04A1D0DFE95B95E & "Eternal
Punishment, Part 1" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12607145320 & "Eternal
Punishment, Part 2" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12607143539). Romans 5:9,
“Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from
wrath through Him.” All Christ-rejecters go to Hell if they die in their
sins. If a person is “saved,” then they are going to Heaven when they
die. Romans 10:13, “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord
shall be saved.” We are saved from the eternal consequences of sin, which
is punishment in hellfire. To be saved is synonymous with being “born
again.” When a person becomes a born-again child of God, they are saved
eternally. EVERY human being MUST to be saved (i.e., born again) to enter
into Heaven. John 3:3, “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the
kingdom of God.” If a person dies in their sins without believing on Jesus
as the Savior, the Son of God, they will burn in Hell forever (Revelation
20:11-15).Just as the disciple who asked Jesus the question in Luke 13:23,
I myself often wonder how few are truly born again believers. I dare say
not many. Let's consider the question again...“Lord, are there few that be
saved?” There are over one billion Catholics in the world who errantly
believe that the Catholic Church is going to save them. Roman Catholics
do not trust Jesus Christ alone; but rather, rely upon manmade
traditions and self-righteous works to save them. According to the Word of
God, genuine Catholics are hellbound in their sins because they are
trusting in self-righteousness (Romans 3:20; 10:3-4; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus
3:5, see our playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the
Virgin Mary" with 129 videos & counting at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715). There are over
one billion Islamic Muslims in the world who deny that Jesus Christ ever
died upon a cross for our sins (see our playlist "Dealing with Islam,
Muslims: Sunni, Shi'ite, Alawites, Sufis" with 67 videos at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1C7F68B548009FDD). According to the
Bible, they are antichrists and liars on their way to Hell (1st John 2:22-23).
There are over 183,000 cults in Japan alone that deny Jesus Christ as the
only Savior of the world. Other false religions include Scientology,
Hinduism, Wicca, Buddhism, Seventh Day Adventism, Zoroastrianism, Greek
Orthodox, Judaism, Jehovah Witness, Mormonism, Freemasonry, and many more
(see our YouTube channel CAnswersTV at
https://www.youtube.com/user/CAnswersTV with over 615 videos covering most
of these anti Christian religions in detail). Why do I call them “false
religions”? It's simply because they all corrupt the Biblical teaching of
salvation, i.e., the gospel (see our playlist "Dealing with Anti
Trinitarians (UPC) & Early Church History" with 48 videos at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9931642C7C8FFEAB). Most false
religions ADD works to faith. Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses DENY the deity
of Jesus Christ (i.e., that He is Almighty God) - see our playlists
"Dealing with Mormonism, the Religion of Mitt Romney & Utah" with 20 videos
at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL11CD0EE613306BB5 & "Dealing with
Jehovah's Witnesses, Watchtower Society" with 22 videos at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLCF0ADB29C0EB8C40. Seventh Day
Adventists falsely and deceitfully redefine faith to mean works (see our
playlist, "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess" with 23
videos at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5316CC6F66F24283). There
are hundreds of millions of followers of Hinduism who deny Jesus as the
Savior, the Son of God (see our playlist "Dealing with Anti Christ Cults,
"New Age" & World Religions" with 42 videos at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL69A3047B3497590A). Judaism denies
that Jesus is the Messiah. The same Pharisaical Jews who crucified Jesus
2,000 years ago are crucifying Him today. The Campbellite Church of Christ
deceitfully speaks of faith in Christ, but also requires water baptism and
living the Christian life to be saved. That is works salvation, which is a
lie of the Devil (Romans 3:20; Romans 4:5-6, see our playlist "Dealing with
"Saved by Works & Baptism", "Church of Christ" with 72 videos at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBD55090718DA6D3D). Every Catholic
claims not to worship Mary, but the second commandment (Exodus 20:3-5)
forbids even bowing to Mary (which every Catholic does, for more on the
Roman Catholic installation of the worship of saints, images, & polytheism
in church history hear "Perseverance of the Saints & the Worship of Saints
(Historical Theology Vol. 1, #17)" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=14101149112 & "The Worship of
Images & Civil Authorities (Historical Theology Vol. 1, #18)" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=15101057200). There are
hundreds of millions of so-called Charismatic & Pentecostal "Christians"
who trade the Word of God for their own wild emotional experiences
& replace the Biblical gospel for a gospel of "heath & wealth" despite 1
Timothy 6:10 saying, "For the love of money is the root of all evil: which
while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced
themselves through with many sorrows" - see our two video series on this:
"Blasphemous Charismatic & Pentecostal Mayhem #1: Mad Delusional
Experiences Replace Scripture Alone" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kbv7YsyMf0I begins one series while "AGONY
OF THE PHONY WORD-FAITH TV PREACHERS #1: MIND SCIENCE ORIGINS OF KENNETH
HAGIN & HIS DISCIPLES" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwQ5BLrYD_U&list=PL2CDA855486B09128&index=4 begins
another series. Even secular humanism, atheism & agnosticism can be
considered faith based religions due to the fact that atheists & humanists
have a faith that God does not exist while agnostics are willingly
ignorant concerning God (see our playlist "Dealing with "God Hating"
Atheists, Agnostics, Know-It-Alls" with 20 videos at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL640E505B96CD6B39). Many animistic
religions exist throughout the world as well which are described in Romans
1:18-32, see our video "FOREIGN MISSIONS FOR CHRIST: PREACHING TO
CANNIBALS, WITCH DOCTORS & TRIBAL NATIVES" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACnDLyXa9H0. All of the religions I have
just mentioned account for well over seven eighths of the earth's
population or more. Keep in mind, besides all of this, Jesus said, "And
again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a
needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God" (Matthew 19:24).
Who are considered "rich people"? It's not just millionaires & world
leaders but many lesser wealthy persons who exceed the vast majority of
mankind in money & possessions (Luke16:19-31 is a good example of this in
the parable of the rich man & Lazarus). See the video "It is Difficult for
Americans to Enter Heaven - Tim Conway" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDwNGXciNCQ. Statistics provided in this
video show that even the poorest Americans living in the United States have
a better net income than most of the world. For instance, according to
Forbes magazine, June 1, 2013, the bottom 5% of United States citizens are
richer than 68% of people living throughout the rest of the world; U.S.
citizens who make $50,000 a year are richer than 99.69% of the people in
the rest of the world; U.S. citizens who make $20,000 a year are richer
than 96% of the people in the rest of the world, U.S. citizens who make
$10,000 a year are richer than 84% of the people in the rest of the world;
U.S. citizens who make $100,000 a year are in a category that only 8 out of
every 10,000 people achieve in the entire world. Will it be difficult for
rich Americans who don't think they're rich to enter into the kingdom of
heaven? Jesus already gave the answer. For more on this hear "Those Whom
God Hates He Is Often Pleased To Give Plenty Of Earthly Things To, Edwards"
at //www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=427121150346 by the well
known theologian Jonathan Edwards who also preached the most famous sermon
on North American soil called, "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=770213541. If you don't like
what I am telling you then get mad at God because He wrote the Bible. If
you take the Bible at FACE VALUE, you can only interpret it one way. The
best way to interpret the Bible is with the Bible. God said what He meant
and meant what He said. Let the Bible speak for itself. Jesus answered the
question in Luke 13:24 with the following words...“...for many, I say unto
you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.” Most of the people in
this world are going straight to Hell when they die because they have not
been born again (hear "Few Saved From A Burning Hell" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=3514145121). Lies and
deception are everywhere! Catholics and Jehovah Witnesses claim to be
born-again but they are NOT. You can't get born-again by doing good works,
confessing your sins to a priest, getting water baptized, joining a church
or keeping the Sabbath Day. Salvation is NOT found in any religion;
but rather, in a Person—The Lord Jesus Christ! Most people today have
churchianity without Christianity, and they are all going to Hell if they
don't repent toward God of their unbelief (for more on this see our video
"TRUE BELIEVERS & NON BELIEVERS ACCORDING TO THE GOSPEL OF THE REFORMATION:
WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE?" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_dN0oC57Rk).
The vast majority of so-called "Evangelical Christians" in the world today
do not know what the Biblical gospel is or what "justification by faith
alone" is (see our video "SAD STATE OF THE CHURCH: 87% OF EVANGELICAL
"CHRISTIANS" DON'T KNOW WHAT GOSPEL JUSTIFICATION IS" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im4ozy_EiR4. There are only two types of
religions in the world: DO and DONE. Either you believe that you have to DO
something to go to Heaven; or else you believe that it is DONE, paid for by
Jesus' precious blood. Jesus said in Luke 13:24 that “many” will seek to
enter into Heaven but will not be able. That is quite startling. Jesus said
the same thing in Matthew 7:21-23 . . . “Not every one that saith unto me,
Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the
will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day,
Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast
out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I
profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work
iniquity.” The reason why these religious people were not allowed into
Heaven was because they attempted to enter Heaven through their own
self-righteousness. In Matthew 5:20 Jesus spake concerning the religious
leaders of His time . . . “For I say unto you, That except your
righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees,
ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.” Most of the
religious churchgoers in the world today are as lost as can be, still
hellbound in their wickedness. They have not done the will of God
concerning salvation, which is to BELIEVE ON THE LORD JESUS CHRIST (John
6:40; Acts 16:30-31). Jesus provides two contrasts in Luke 13:24, the
contrast between seeking to enter and striving to enter and the contrast
between seeking to enter through the narrow door and seeking to enter by
any other means. Let’s now focus on the second contrast. Look at verses
25-27:"Once the head of the house gets up and shuts the door, and you begin
to stand outside and knock on the door, saying, 'Lord, open up to us!' then
He will answer and say to you, 'I do not know where you are from.' 26 "Then
you will begin to say, 'We ate and drank in Your presence, and You taught
in our streets'; 27 and He will say, 'I tell you, I do not know where you
are from; DEPART FROM ME, ALL YOU EVILDOERS.' (Luke 13:25 NAU) Jesus’
statement at the end of 25 and the middle of 27 is translated well in the
NIV: “I don't know you or where you come from.” In effect, He is saying, “I
don’t know you at all! You may think that you are mine, but I have nothing
to do with you – I don’t even know your family, your village” So what does
Jesus mean by the narrow door? What is His intended contrast with other
methods of entering? Again, let’s begin by considering what the narrow door
is not: The narrow door is NOT being in a church, reading the Bible,
listening to sermons, looking to others like a Christian. This is clear
from verse 26: these evildoers looked just like believers who had been with
Jesus. They had listened to His preaching. But He does not know them, and
they stand condemned.The narrow door is NOT being prominent in this life.
Jesus says in verse 30 that some who are presently first will be last.
Prominence now is no guarantee of one’s entering through the narrow
door.The narrow door is NOT being a descendant of a great believer. See
verse 28. Remember, Jesus is speaking to descendants of Abraham and Jacob.
I sometimes like to use the expression, “God has no grandchildren.” Each of
us must come to Jesus on our own, not through our parents, our
grandparents, or other ancestors. Then what does Jesus mean by the narrow
door? Elsewhere, Jesus says He Himself is the door: I am the door. If
anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find
pasture. (John 10:9) In what sense is this door narrow? In two ways. First,
the door is narrow in the sense that no one comes to the Father any other
way (John 14:6). No religious activities – Christian or non-Christian –
bring us into the Kingdom. Sincere beliefs do not bring us in. Good works
do not bring us in. Good feelings about our relationship with Christ do not
bring us in. Though in our pluralistic society this message is despised, we
must preach, teach, and live out this truth: There is only one door, and
that narrow door is Jesus. The Lake of Fire is waiting for "many" when they
die. Jesus' disciple asked Him if few people are going to Heaven. Jesus
replied that many people will attempt, but fail. When the floods came in
Noah's day, many people tried to get on the ark, but it was too late once
the door was closed. When the bridegroom came in Matthew 25:1-13, the five
foolish virgins were left behind because they were gone buying oil at the
last moment. Do not likewise make the mistake of delaying salvation, for
you will be sorry when it is too late. Few souls are going to Heaven. Jesus
said, "Only those who find that strait gate and narrow way that leadeth
unto life (Matthew 7:13-15), which is the righteousness of Jesus Christ
will make it to heaven. So many churchgoers have religion, but they have
never truly been born of the spirit of God, which is the Spirit of Christ
(Romans 8:9, hear "Why Are So Few People Saved?" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=111710103558). Salvation
happens when a person acknowledges their guilt of sin unto God in
repentance; believing on Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, to be
forgiven (this is a supernatural action caused by God in the heart of a
repentant sinner in 2 Timothy 2:24-26; see also "SUPERNATURAL BIBLE
PROPHECY CONCERNING JESUS THE JEWISH MESSIAH (PART #1)" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVByqkjwChs). We are SINNERS and Jesus is
the wonderful SAVIOR! Acts 10:43, “To Him give all the prophets
witness, that through His name whosoever believeth in Him shall receive
remission of sins.” Salvation is given to those "few" who have been
ordained to eternal life by God Himself (Acts 13:48). And who are those
"few"? Jesus answers that question in John chapter 6:37,39,44,63 & 65: "All
that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I
will in no wise cast out." "And this is the Father's will which hath sent
me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should
raise it up again at the last day." "No man can come to me, except the
Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last
day." " It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the
words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." "And he
said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it
were given unto him of my Father." For more on this see our video "The
Sovereignty of God Versus Man-Made Religions, Hollywood Movies & Petty
Emotionalism" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UQABR_9gGI. Keep in mind
that God works with relatively few numbers throughout world history
(remember how Elijah thought he was the last prophet of God left in Israel
in 1 Kings 19:13-18 & the Lord had to correct Elijah about the number but
still the number God told Elijah was small). The God of the Bible has
always had His way of operating His plan in this world & it has always been
consistently with small numbers (1 Corinthians 1:26-29, "For ye see your
calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many
mighty, not many noble, are called: 27 But God hath chosen the foolish
things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak
things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; 28 And base
things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea,
and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:29 That no
flesh should glory in his presence." For an excellent message concerning
the small numbers God has historically employed please hear the outstanding
theologian Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones in his sermon "Sermon 113 - Three-score
and Fifteen Souls" at
//www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=99217141430450. We also have
a video along these lines called " Biblical Predestination #6: God Only
Chooses a FEW for Salvation (Many Called/Few Chosen)" -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veCdGzYsc70. See also our video "Strive To
Enter - But Many Will Not Be Able To - Greg Van Court - Dayspring
Fellowship, Austin, TX" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr2Rn-7o4RA. 2
Timothy 2:15, "Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that
needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." 2 Corinthians
13:5, "Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own
selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you,
except ye be reprobates?"
But "faith without works is dead ... James 2:20." If you are Roman Catholic
see our playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin
Mary" with 123 videos & counting at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715. If you are a
Seventh-day Adventist see our playlist "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism
& Their "Prophetess"" with 23 videos & counting at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5316CC6F66F24283. If you are a
Campbellite follower of the "Church of Christ" see our playlist "Dealing
with "Saved by Works & Baptism", "Church of Christ"" with 72 videos &
counting at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBD55090718DA6D3D. See
our video "KEEPING THE OLD TESTAMENT LAWS & COMMANDMENTS CANNOT EARN HEAVEN
OR SALVATION WITH GOD!" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIh3T31ujuU. Are
We Justified by Faith (Romans) or by Works (James)? In Romans it says,
"because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight .
. . " (Rom. 3:20) "for we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart
from works of the Law." (Rom. 3:28) "For what does the Scripture say? ‘And
Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.'" (Rom.
4:3) "Therefore, having been justified by faith . . . " (Rom. 5:1) "But to
the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly,
his faith is reckoned as righteousness." (Rom. 4:5). In James it says, "You
see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." (James 2:24)
" . . . so also faith without works is dead." (James 2:26). Which is it?
Are we justified by faith or by works? Does the Bible Contradict--Itself?
It is a fundamental Christian belief that we are justified by faith.
Justification means that God declares a sinner to be righteous. He does
this by crediting--by reckoning the righteousness of Jesus to the sinner.
This is done by faith. That is, when the sinner puts his faith in the
sacrifice of Jesus and trusts in Him and not himself for righteousness,
then God justifies him. "And Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to
him as righteousness." (Rom. 4:3). But, if the Bible teaches that we are
justified by faith, does it also teach we are justified by works as James
"seems" to say? Do we have a contradiction? The answer is no. Context is
Everything It is erroneous to take a verse, read it without its context,
and then attempt to develop a doctrine from that verse alone. Therefore,
let's take a look at the context of James 2:24 which says that a man is
justified by works. James chapter 2 has 26 verses: Verses 1-7 instruct us
not to show favoritism. Verses 8-13 are comments on the Law. Verses 14-26
are about the relationship between faith and works. Notice that James
begins this section by using the example of someone who says he has
faith--verse 14. He then immediately gives an example of what true and
false faiths are. He begins with the negative and demonstrates what an
empty faith is (verses 15-17). Then he gives an example of the type of
faith that isn't much different from the faith of demons (verse 19).
Finally, he gives examples of living faith by showing Abraham and Rahab as
the type of people who demonstrated their faith by their deeds. James is
examining two kinds of faith: one that leads to godly works and one that
does not. One is true, and the other is false. One is dead, the other
alive; hence, "Faith without works is dead." (James 2:20). This is why in
the middle of his section on faith and works, he says in verse 19, "You
believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and
shudder." James says this because the demons believe in God; that is, they
have faith, but the faith they have is useless. It does not result in
appropriate works. Their faith is only a mental acknowledgment of God's
existence. Ascentia and Fiducia Two words are worth introducing here:
ascentia and fiducia. Ascentia is the mental assent--the mental
acknowledgment of something's existence. The demons acknowledge and believe
that God exists. Fiducia is more than mental acknowledgment. It involves
a trust in something--a giving over to it, a complete believing and
acceptance of something. This is the kind of faith that a Christian has in
Christ. A Christian, therefore, has fiducia; that is, he has real faith
and trust in Christ and not simply an acknowledgment that He lived on earth
at one time. Another way to put this is that there are many people in the
world who believed that Jesus lived: ascentia. But they do not believe
that He is their savior, the one to whom they should look and trust for the
forgiveness of their sins. Ascentia does not lead to works. Fiducia does.
Ascentia is not of the heart. Fiducia is. What is James Saying? James is
simply saying that if you ‘say' you are a Christian, then there had better
be some appropriate works manifested, or your faith is false. This
sentiment is echoed in 1 John 2:4 which says, "If you say you have come to
know Him, yet you do not keep His commandments, then the truth is not in
you and you are a liar." Apparently, there were people who were saying they
were Christians but were not manifesting any of the fruit of Christianity.
Can this faith justify? Can the dead ‘faith' that someone has which
produces no change in a person and no good works before men and God be a
faith that justifies? Absolutely not. It is not merely enough to say you
believe in Jesus. You must actually believe and trust in Him. If you
actually do, then you will demonstrate that faith by a changed and godly
life. If not, then your profession is of no more value than the same
profession of demons: "We believe Jesus lived." Notice that James actually
quotes the same verse that Paul uses to support the teaching of
justification by faith in Rom. 4:3. James 2:23 says, "and the Scripture
was fulfilled which says, ‘and Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to
him as righteousness.'" If James was trying to teach a contradictory
doctrine of faith and works than the other New Testament writers, then he
would not have used Abraham as an example. Therefore, we are justified by
faith. That is, we are made righteous in the eyes of God by faith as is
amply demonstrated by Romans. However, that faith, if it is true, will
result in deeds appropriate to salvation. After all, didn't God say in
Eph. 2:8-10, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not
of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one
should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good
works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." What is
the relationship between faith & works? The relationship between faith and
works is that works are the result of faith. In the Bible, faith and works
are very often contrasted. They are not the same thing, and the
combination of faith and works does not bring salvation. Salvation is by
faith alone. Rom. 3:28, “For we maintain that a man is justified by faith
apart from works of the Law.” Rom. 4:5, “But to the one who does not work,
but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as
righteousness.” Gal. 2:16, “nevertheless knowing that a man is not
justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus…” False
religious systems always teach that faith plus a person's works result in
salvation. This is false, because our good works are filthy rags before
God (Isa. 64:6). Therefore, we can’t do anything to please God by our good
works. Gal. 2:21 says that if righteousness comes by the law (works), then
Christ died needlessly. Faith without works is dead James 2:26 says that
faith without works is dead, but what James is talking about is that dead
faith produces no works. The context of the chapter begins in verse 14
where James says, “What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith,
but he has no works? Can that faith save him?” Notice that James asks,
“can that faith save him?" The faith he is talking about is false faith,
which he further clarifies when he mentions how the devil also believes in
God (v. 19). The Devil has dead faith. He only acknowledges God’s
existence. So, with a real Christian, good works are the result of saving
faith, not a contributing factor to salvation. Nor do our good works keep
us saved. If that were the case, then salvation would be by works. Are we
saved by faith alone, or do we need works, too? Roman Catholics often
mention that the Bible never says we are saved by faith alone and that the
phrase "faith alone" occurs only once in James where it says that we are
not saved by faith alone. If this is so, then why do the Protestants say we
are justified by faith alone and not by works? Because the Bible teaches
that we are justified by faith alone--and not by works. The following is a
list of verses about being saved by faith. Please take note that faith and
works are contrasted. In other words, we are saved by faith "not by works"
and "apart from works," etc. The point is that there are only two options.
We are saved by faith alone, or we are not. Since we have faith and works
(both conceptually and in practice), then we are either saved by faith
alone or by faith and works. There is no other option. If we see that the
Scriptures exclude works in any form as a means of our salvation, then
logically, we are saved by faith alone. Let's take a look at what the
Bible says about faith and works. Then, afterwards, we will tackle James'
statement about "faith alone." Rom. 3:28-30, "For we maintain that a man is
justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 29Or is God the God of Jews
only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30since
indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised
through faith is one." Rom. 4:5, "But to the one who does not work, but
believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as
righteousness," Rom. 5:1, "therefore having been justified by faith, we
have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ;" Rom. 9:30, "What shall
we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained
righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith;" Rom. 10:4, "For
Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes."
Rom. 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works,
otherwise grace is no longer grace." Gal. 2:16, "nevertheless knowing that
a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ
Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by
faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the
Law shall no flesh be justified." Gal. 2:21, I do not nullify the grace of
God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died
needlessly. Gal. 3:5-6, "Does He then, who provides you with the Spirit and
works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with
faith? 6Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as
righteousness." Gal. 3:24, "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead
us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith." Eph. 2:8-9, "For by grace
you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the
gift of God. 9Not by works, lest any man should boast." Phil. 3:9, "and may
be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law,
but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes
from God on the basis of faith." Again, works/Law is contrasted with faith
repeatedly; and we are told that we are not justified by works in any way.
Therefore, we are made right with God by faith--not by faith and our works,
hence, faith alone. James 2:24, not by faith alone The Scriptures clearly
teach that we are saved (justified) by faith in Christ and what He has done
on the cross. This faith alone saves us. However, we cannot stop here
without addressing what James says in James 2:24, "You see that a man is
justified by works, and not by faith alone." There is no contradiction.
All you need to do is look at the context. James chapter 2 has 26 verses:
Verses 1-7 instruct us not to show favoritism. Verses 8-13 are comments on
the Law. Verses 14-26 are about the relationship between faith and works.
James begins this section by using the example of someone who says he has
faith but has no works, "What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has
faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him?" (James 2:14). In
other words, James is addressing the issue of a dead faith--a faith that is
nothing more than a verbal pronouncement, a public confession of the mind,
and is not heart-felt. It is empty of life and action. He begins with the
negative and demonstrates what an empty faith is (verses 15-17, words
without actions). Then he shows that type of faith isn't any different from
the faith of demons (verse 19). Finally, he gives examples of living faith
that has words followed by actions. Works follow true faith and
demonstrate that faith to our fellow man but not to God. James writes of
Abraham and Rahab as examples of people who demonstrated their faith by
their deeds. In brief, James is examining two kinds of faith: one that
leads to godly works and one that does not. One is true, and the other is
false. One is dead, the other alive; hence, "Faith without works is dead,"
(James 2:20). But, he is not contradicting the verses above that say
salvation/justification is by faith alone. Also, notice that James actually
quotes the same verse that Paul quotes in Rom. 4:3 amongst a host of verses
dealing with justification by faith. James 2:23 says, "and the Scripture
was fulfilled which says, and Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to
him as righteousness.'" If James was trying to teach a contradictory
doctrine of faith and works than the other New Testament writers, then he
would not have used Abraham as an example. Therefore, we can see that
justification is by faith alone and that James was talking about false
faith--not real faith--when he said that we are not justified by faith
alone. What about Faith vs. Works? Question: What about Faith vs. Works?
Answer: Faith vs Works--a quick and simple explanation James 2:22 is
addressing a worldly way to show our faith to others who watch us operate
as a church. We know this because he says "Pure religion is . . . to visit
the fatherless and widowed" (James 1:27). The Apostle Paul is explaining
faith as God sees it. "What then shall we say that Abraham our father has
found according to the flesh?* 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he
has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the
Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for
righteousness." 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace
but as debt. 5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who
justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as
David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes
righteousness apart from works: 7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds
are forgiven, And whose sins are covered; 8 Blessed is the man to whom the
Lord shall not impute sin," Rom 4:1-8. Now, let's see how James looks at a
dead faith without works: "What doth it profit, my brethren [target
audience=church], though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can
faith save him? [that faith is a false or a DEAD faith] 15 If a brother or
sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, 16 And one of you say unto
them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give
them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. 18 Yea, a man
may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy
works, and I will shew thee my [true] faith by my works. 19 Thou believest
that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and
tremble. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is
dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered
Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his
works, and by works was faith made perfect? 23 And the scripture was
fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him
for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. 24 Ye see then how
that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only [a false faith],"
James 2:14-24. James is saying that a person with dead faith will walk by
the hungry because he or she is not really saved. When a Christian feeds
the hungry, that is how he or she shows others that he has a real faith. On
the other hand, the Apostle Paul says that Abraham was not justified by his
works because his works do not justify him "before God," Romans 4:2. This
is a true faith that God sees apart from works. What does Romans 4:1-4 say?
“What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the
flesh, hath found? 2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath
whereof to glory; but not before God. 3 For what saith the scripture?
Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. 4 Now
to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But
to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly,
his faith is counted for righteousness,” Romans 4:1-4. True faith will be
enough for God. However, to the church, faith is revealed in our efforts.
Thus, there is no contradiction between the book of James and the book of
Romans. Galatians 1:6-9, "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him
that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is
not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the
gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any
other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be
accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any
other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." For
more information see our website www.BibleQuery.org.
Question: "Is the perpetual virginity of Mary biblical?" Answer: It is the
official position of the Roman Catholic Church that Jesus' mother Mary
remained a virgin for her entire life. Is this concept biblical? Before we
look at specific Scriptures, it is important to understand why the Roman
Catholic Church believes in the perpetual virginity of Mary. The Roman
Catholic Church views Mary as "the Mother of God" and "Queen of Heaven."
Catholics believe Mary to have an exalted place in Heaven, with the closest
access to Jesus and God the Father. Such a concept is nowhere taught in
Scripture. Further, even if Mary did occupy such an exalted position, her
having sexual intercourse would not have prevented her from gaining such a
position. Sex in marriage is not sinful. Mary would have in no way defiled
herself by having sexual relations with Joseph her husband. The entire
concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary is based on an unbiblical
teaching, Mary as Queen of Heaven, and on an unbiblical understanding of
sex.
So, what does the Bible say about the perpetual virginity of Mary? Using
the New American Bible, which is a Catholic translation, we can see that
the perpetual virginity of Mary is not taught in the Bible. Matthew 1:25
NAB tells us, "He had no relations with her until she bore a son, and he
named him Jesus." He, Joseph, did not have sexual relations with her, Mary,
UNTIL after she bore a son, Jesus." The meaning of this Scripture is
abundantly clear. Joseph and Mary did not have sexual relations until after
Jesus was born. Matthew 13:55-56 NAB declares, "Is He not the carpenter's
son? Is not his mother named Mary and his brothers James, Joseph, Simon,
and Judas? Are not His sisters all with us?" Catholics claim, correctly,
that the Greek terms for "brothers" and "sisters" in these verses could
also refer to male and female relatives, not necessarily literal brothers
and sisters. However, the intended meaning is clear, they thought Jesus to
be Joseph's son, the son of Mary, and the brother of James, Joseph, Simon,
and Judas, and the brother of the unnamed and unnumbered sisters. Father,
mother, brother, sister. It is straining the meaning of the text to
interpret “brothers” and “sisters” as "cousins" or "relatives" with the
mentioning of Jesus' mother and father.
Matthew 12:46 NAB tells us, "While He was still speaking to the crowds, His
mother and His brothers appeared outside, wishing to speak with Him." See
also Mark 3:31-34; Luke 8:19-21; John 2:12; and Acts 1:14. All mention
Jesus' mother with His brothers. If they were His cousins, or the sons of
Joseph from a previous marriage, why were they mentioned with Mary so
often? The idea of the perpetual virginity of Mary cannot be drawn from
Scripture. It must be forced on Scripture, in contradiction to what the
Scriptures clearly state.
Question: "What is Mariology?"
Answer: Mariology is the theological study of Mary, the mother of Jesus.
Within the Roman Catholic Church, Mary is venerated over all other saints.
Anglicans share some of the beliefs of Roman Catholic Mariology, but not
all. The Eastern Orthodox Church calls Mary the “God-bearer,” emphasizing
Mary’s status as the mother of God Incarnate, gives her the title “Ever
Virgin,” and emphasizes her sublime holiness, her share in redemption, and
her role as a mediator of grace.
Most Protestants endorse the Apostles’ Creed, which acknowledges the virgin
birth of Christ, do they not believe in most of the other tenets of
Mariology. Protestants denounce the veneration of Mary as practiced by
Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.
The four dogmas of Roman Catholic Mariology are: 1) the title “Mother of
God”; 2) the Immaculate Conception; 3) the Perpetual Virginity of Mary; and
4) the Assumption of Mary.
Mother of God: In AD 431, the Council of Ephesus countered the Nestorian
heresy by declaring that Mary was truly the Mother of God: “Not that the
nature of the Word or his divinity received the beginning of its existence
from Mary, but the holy body, animated by a rational soul, which the Word
of God united to himself, was born from Mary.” One problem with this
wording is that it awakened the old Arian heresy that the Logos (Jesus) was
a created being. In AD 451, at the Council of Chalcedon, Leo, Bishop of
Rome, ratified the decision that Mary was theotokos (“God-bearer”) only as
to the humanity of Jesus. The title had nothing to do with Jesus’ divinity
as the eternal Word of God. The Chalcedonian definition added the words “as
to the manhood” immediately after theotokos, which should have ended
erroneous thinking. But the populace took this word theotokos as an
uplifting of Mary’s status and started to venerate her. The term theotokos
was not incorporated into the Nicene Creed of 321 or the Constantinopolitan
Creed of 381. Neither is that expression used in the Anglican Articles or
in the Westminster Confession of Faith.
Immaculate Conception: This tenet of Mariology holds that Mary, at her
conception, was sinless (immaculate), preserved from original sin.
According to the Roman Catholic Encyclopedia of Theology, no statement of
Mary’s being free from original sin is found in the West before AD 1000. It
was not until 1854 that faith in Mary’s Immaculate Conception was taught as
an official church dogma.
Perpetual Virginity: According to Roman Catholic Mariology, Mary was always
a virgin before, during, and after giving birth to Jesus. The Roman
Catholic Encyclopedia of Theology admits that the formula of “virginity
before, in and after giving birth” did not come into use till after the 7th
century.
Assumption: The Assumption of Mary teaches that Mary, when she died, was
taken up (assumed) body and soul into heavenly glory. It was not until 1950
that Pope Pius XII defined the doctrine of “Mary’s bodily assumption into
heaven.”
Mary’s role in salvation: Another element of Roman Catholic Mariology is
the belief that, at the conception of Jesus, Mary entered into a spiritual
union with Him. Pope John Paul II discussed Mary’s place in the plan of
salvation in the encyclical Redemptoris Mater, emphasizing “the special
presence of the Mother of God in the mystery of Christ and his Church. For
this is a fundamental dimension emerging from the Mariology of the
Council.” Pope Benedict XVI stated that “Christology and Mariology are
inseparably interwoven.”
The Catholic Encyclopedia states, “In [Mary’s] Fiat of faith, she received
salvation for all. . . . Mary’s mediatorship is to be understood on the
level of the solidarity of all mankind which is in need of redemption. . .
.The function of Mary in salvation determines her relation to the Church. .
. . Mary is mother of the Church under this more individualistic aspect,
since she is effectively concerned for the salvation of each individual”
(pages 898–901).
Within Catholicism, there is a drive to define a new Marian dogma in which
Catholics, as a matter of faith, would be obliged to accept these three
doctrines: 1) Mary participates in redemption with Jesus Christ; 2) grace
is granted by Jesus only through the intercession of Mary; and 3) all
prayers from the faithful must flow through Mary, who brings them to the
attention of her Son. This movement would, in practice, redefine the
Trinity as a kind of Quartet. The idea that Mary is a co-redemptrix or
mediatrix contradicts 1 Timothy 2:5, which says, “For there is one God and
one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus.” Jesus is the
Mediator. There is no mediator between man and Jesus. Jesus Himself dwells
in believers; thus, no other mediator is required (Colossians 1:27).
Nowhere in Scripture does Jesus or anyone else direct any praise, glory, or
adoration toward Mary. Mary was present at the cross when Jesus died (John
19:25). Mary was also with the apostles on the day of Pentecost (Acts 1:14).
However, Mary is never mentioned again after Acts 1. The apostles did not
give Mary a prominent role. Mary’s death is not recorded in the Bible.
Nothing is said about Mary ascending to heaven or having an exalted role
there. As the earthly mother of Jesus, Mary should be respected, but she is
not worthy of worship or adoration. The Bible nowhere indicates that Mary
can hear our prayers or that she can mediate for us with God. Mary herself
sets the example for us in directing her worship, adoration, and praise to
God alone: “My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my
Savior, for He has been mindful of the humble state of His servant. From
now on all generations will call me blessed, for the Mighty One has done
great things for me—holy is His name” (Luke 1:46–49).
For more see our playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the
Virgin Mary" with 131 videos at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715. Titus 1:9-16
Two items that come in handy in knowing about when Romanists argue that
anything said against the Roman "church" is not the truth is to tell them
about the following two items: 1. The following website is by self
proclaimed Roman Catholics following the so-called "true church" (in other
words their Roman church is their true savior not the Biblical Jesus
Christ) at //www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/. These Romanists destroy
the new Romanists since the invention of Vatican 2 in 1965. They present
great information proving modern Romanism & their popes (they call them
anti-popes) to be a false & apostate religion. It doesn't get much better
than this when one group of apostate Romanists attack another brand of
apostate Romanists in order to prove to the world they are false! 2. Our
video "The Homosexual Pope, Priests, Universalists, Evolutionists &
Disunited Roman Catholic Apologists" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hThonwrX6QU&list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715 proves
from Roman Catholic sources themselves that one of their popes was a
practicing homosexual, that almost 50% of Roman Catholic priests are
homosexuals (for more on this see our video "FORMER ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST
SAYS CHURCH OF ROME HAS A FALSE GOSPEL & WIDESPREAD HOMOSEXUALITY" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y4C-nBQ3mE), that the Roman church buys
the theory of evolution which denies the first eleven chapters of Genesis
in the Bible, that Pope John Paul II kissed the Muslim Qur'an & said Islam
has the same god as Roman Catholics have (see the videos "Top Ten Reasons
Muhammad Is Not a Prophet" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO8sZ1JyP1A,
"Ten MORE Reasons Muhammad Is Not a Prophet" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4p7HuuhF8k, "50 Reasons Muhammad Was Not a
Prophet (in Under Five Minutes)" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Q3f15NXrLI, "David Wood: Five Reasons the
Quran Is Not the Word of God" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvlzlBov9zc,
"Who Killed Muhammad?" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6st_tFj6ouM,
"Why Did Muhammad Wear Women's Clothing?" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-50CraaniT0; also see
www.AnsweringMuslims.com & www.MuslimHope.com) & how Roman Catholic
apologists are at each others' throats because of the vast differences
within Romanism itself. Besides all that see the following websites for
detailed information on Romanism & how it is a counterfeit religion at
www.BereanBeacon.org, www.CWRC-RZ.org & //www.mtc.org/. Our playlist
"Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin Mary" currently has
117 videos refuting Romanism at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715. Remember Titus
1:9-16,
"9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be
able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.
10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they
of the circumcision:
11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things
which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.
12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, the Cretians are
alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be
sound in the faith;
14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn
from the truth.
15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and
unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.
16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being
abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate."
"Evangelical" Christianity (see our video "ECUMENICAL CHAOS: Going to Bed
With Roman Catholic False Prophets & Idolaters" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S76Nvi6p0lw) is awash in bad theology (via
Wesley & Finney), bad leadership (like Billy Graham & TBN), & Biblical
ignorance (87% don't know the Gospel or what justificaton is) thus it seems
to accept anyone who claims to be a Christian (like Romanists, Mormons,
Seventh-day Adventists or whoever). For proof of this see the following:
"Methodist Founder & Self Proclaimed Heathen John Wesley Said He Never
Believed In or Loved God" (short version) at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_bz2RyShFI & "JOHN WESLEY, FOUNDER OF
METHODISM & AN ARMINIAN, SAID HE DID NOT LOVE GOD & WAS "AN HONEST HEATHEN"
(long version) at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Vo3ljr7ccs; BEWARE OF
FALSE PROPHETS: CHARLES GRANDISON FINNEY - PHONY REVIVALIST & ARCH-HERETIC
at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rUbi8AJRw4, "Exclusive Interview with
Dave Hunt about the Gospel-less Mother Teresa & Compromiser Billy Graham"
at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YtX1DirDI4&list=UUQ_EDvOtDAAWfCvGUhd6y3A,
Our playlist "Dealing with Phony TV Preachers (TBN) & King James Onlyites"
at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2CDA855486B09128 & "SAD STATE OF
THE CHURCH: 87% OF EVANGELICAL "CHRISTIANS" DON'T KNOW WHAT GOSPEL
JUSTIFICATION IS" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=im4ozy_EiR4. See our
playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin Mary" with
119 videos at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715, our
playlist "Dealing with Mormonism, the Religion of Mitt Romney & Utah" with
20 videos at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL11CD0EE613306BB5 & our
playlist "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess" at
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5316CC6F66F24283. Billy Graham's
false views on universal salvation & hell distort the Gospel message & is
another reason he is so popular with the world (Galatians 1:6-10, see our
playlist "Dealing with Hell, Lake of Fire, Unpopular Bible Doctrines" with
30 videos at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE04A1D0DFE95B95E).
Please reference the websites: www.BereanBeacon & www.CWRC-RZ.org. The
simple Biblical fact is that few are going to be saved from the wrath of
God & hell (Luke 13:23-30, Matthew 7:13-29, etc.); see our video on this:
"Unpopular Bible Doctrines #2: Many "Christians" Are Not Real; God Loves
Judgment; No Forgiveness" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJIlReP9SFw.
All the ecumenical "love" & "harmony" in the world is not going to change
the fact that God still hates false religions (Deuteronomy 28:64, 32:17,
21, Leviticus 17:7, Psalm 106:37, Jeremiah 44:3, 1 Corinthians 10:20, see
also //biblehub.com/deuteronomy/32-17.htm) & false doctrine
(Revelation 2:6,14-15, 2 Peter 2:15, etc.). Thus following the Bible alone
is the only safe path to travel (2 Timothy 3:15-17, 4:2-5, 1 Timothy
1:3-11, 6:3-5, etc.; see our video "WITHOUT "SOLA SCRIPTURA" (THE BIBLE
ALONE), WHO IS TELLING THE TRUTH?" at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcMnF6tgya0). 2 Timothy 2:15
Those interested in the current events going on within the Roman Catholic
Church can see our video at The Homosexual Pope, Priests, Universalists,
Evolutionists & Disunited Roman Catholic Apologists. To hear a former Roman
Catholic priest for 22 years discuss the Roman view of the Bible & what it
teaches see Ex-Roman Catholic Priest for 22 Years Says Roman Catholicism
Opposes Absolute Biblical Truth. To hear former nuns give their testimony
see A Nun's Story: From Convent Bondage (Sexual Desire, Dating Priests,
Rituals, No Bible) to Jesus & FORMER ROMAN CATHOLIC "BRIDE OF CHRIST" NUN
TESTIFIES OF ABNORMAL LIFE IN THE CONVENT. For those interested in early
church history see our videos at EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH HISTORY PROVES
ROMAN CATHOLICISM FALSE, EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH HISTORY #14: PRE-NICENE
(325 A.D.) CHURCH WAS NOT A ROMAN CATHOLIC SYSTEM & HISTORICAL SPLIT
BETWEEN ROMAN CATHOLICISM & THE CHRIST OF THE SCRIPTURE: MAN'S WORD OR
GOD'S WORD?. To see all our videos on the Roman Catholic religion click on
our playlist called, "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin
Mary" at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFFA8D69D1B914715. Websites
of interest are: //www.BereanBeacon.org & //www.CWCR-RZ.ORG. When
it comes to Roman Catholic traditions remember Jeremiah 7:31 where God
said, "which I commanded them not, neither came it into my heart" & the
words of Jesus in Matthew 15:1-14, "Then came to Jesus scribes and
Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,
2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they
wash not their hands when they eat bread.
3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the
commandment of God by your tradition?
4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that
curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a
gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye
made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with
their lips; but their heart is far from me.
9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments
of men.
10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand:
11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which
cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the
Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
13 But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not
planted, shall be rooted up.
14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind
lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch."
Hitler Finds out Chuck Norris is Coming REACTION!!!
GET YOUR MAGNUS MERCHANDISE HERE: //493672.spreadshirt.com/ VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrHmcpRAZNs JOIN ME ON MY ...
+John Hardin The video is a Movie, not sure what the name is and someone just put subtitles over the video, Hitler isn't actually talking about Chuck Norris.
Stephen Colbert talks to Walt Maciborski about Austin, Texas
Stephen Colbert talks to KEYE-TV'S Walt Maciborski about his fascination with the bat colony in Austin, Texas. He also has some advice for former Texas ...
"Atheists Can't Be Republicans" Author CJ Werleman
CJ Werleman is a top atheist writer, political commentator, and humorist, and is the author of many books, including "Jesus Lied: He Was Only Human: ...
I kind of like this atheist. Only difference is, he's atheist I'm not. I
have no issue with him in this life. I believe in gay rights - and I can
prove that's right from the Qur'an. As for all the Sam Harris fanboys, they
are as closed minded, divisive and warmongering as those they are
supposedly against. Harris reckons Muslims should be profiled, same as
Trump.
+SamuraigamerInfantile?That's rich coming from a Harris chimp."Muslims don't read books"Is this what Ziocon Harris preaches to his neuro linguistically programmed dummies with their tongues up his butt?So skilled Muslim physicians become qualified medical practitioners? By observing camel dung and goat's droppings? Oooh, it must be true.Have you got anymore educative pearls of wisdom to offer?LOL my arse off.Are you insane or perhaps mentally retarded?schmuckHe says Arabs don't read and therefore have no need of books and writing??? Ja, from thousands of years ago. The Arabic.What a deranged zio-chimp.Please wave your genitals in front of a donkey, it is such an insightful entertainment for your admirers."Let's ban all Muslims from entering America".LOL, you crazed cultist fringe loony.
+Islam Moodliaryou are seriously infantile at arguing your position. you need decades of education to be able to stand in a discussion(education ≠ reading a single holy book over and over again)
+SamuraigamerHarris is the zio-atheist organ grinder, and you are his dancing chimp.You want to profile all Muslims as tenuous collective suspects because your ZIOCON jew demigod says so?Then you squeal and wet your pants at the suggestion all affiliated ZIOCON AIPAC Jews be profiled too for crimes against humanity. In special camps.You're no "intellectual", only a neuro-linguistically programmed zio-monkey with intellectual capacity of an acorn.Once you take the Muslim's freedomsyou are taking everybody's freedoms.That is the truth, ZIONAZI neanderthal.
+Islam Moodliaryou are so far off the topic, not only I don't understand what you're talking about, but i'd argue that you don't understand what you're talking aboutwe are arguing about public transportation profiling (airports etc) and security in public areas and you bring up crimes against humanity. G.Bush and B.Clinton are scum of the earth and responsible for countless of thousads civilian victims. should they be striped and thoroughly searched everytime they use the airport to travel?* NO, OF COURSE NOT*can you understand what we are discussing this whole time? can you see why sam harris is regarded as one of the world's top thinkers and intellectuals by millions, and you are just a guy on the internet who keeps typing jews/zionist/neocon in every fucking sentence like a deranged person?
+SamuraigamerAmerica? No. Neocon jews. You want to profile all Muslims why not all Jews? Guilt by association.Who is responsible for more death and crimes against humanity, American Muslims or patriotic Israeli duel nationality neocon jews who ordered the deaths of millions on a pack of lies, including the needless deaths of thousands of American service personal?The AIPAC lobby and criminal banking class rounded up and placed in profiling camps for their wicked crimes of holohaust?Hmmm, zio-monkey? Show your dazzling intelligence.
+Islam Moodliarso you didn't want to answer my question on profiling because america launches wars in foreign countries.in which country does this reasoning of yours passes for common sense and intelligent conversation?
+SamuraigamerOh yes because it's racism to question the synagogue of Satan - but "freedom and democracy" to launch wars on foreign countries killing millions for oil and plunder, by a bunch of neocon jews and then insist "We should profile Muslims, or anyone who looks like he or she could conceivably be Muslim".You're the one that wants to profile Muslims yet you whine and squeal: "I'd never have thought that the answer to my question was: because you are jew".Oh yes, incredible, unbelievable.Shove it up your ass, zio-monkey freak.
+Islam Moodliarincredible answer. unbelievable. man, you totally demolished me intellectually (and sam harris in the process too). I'd never have thought that the answer to my question was : because you are jewI didn't even know i was a jew until u opened my eyes. outstanding
+SamuraigamerFirst you ask: "Harris reckons Muslims should be profiled" when did he say that?Yes, you come to the defense of your demigod as if such a statement is a false slur. Then when it proves to be true you seek to justify it in concurrence with your Harris demigod. The fact is zio-monkey, American citizens are are 1000 times more likely to be killed by US cops than by "people of the muslim faith".Do you want proof of that as well, zio-monkey? Maybe you jews ought to be rounded up and profiled because of all the jew bankers scamming the populous out of $Trillions and crippling the economy - How do you like that, zio-monkey?
+Islam Moodliari didnt object to the possibility of this quote existing. i merely asked where it is so i can read it. unless asking questions is prohibited it justifies your reaction to jump onto the higher branch of morality and preach from there like a "zio-monkey" climbs a tree.I didn't understand your response about the gay rights thing.So, if people of the muslim faith is by far the highest risk we face at this time in history in regards to terrorism why is sam harris wrong when he says we should profile them? mind you,this includes even sam harris and many atheists alike.If you or me are sitting for example in a coffee shop in france and people with machine guns come and start killing everybody yelling allahu akbar, they won't wait until you explain to them you share their faith. you will just be another target to shoot.If buddhists with shaved heads start doing the same things tomorrow as muslims do today, of course sam would also include them as well. what is wrong with that exactly
+Samuraigamer2. "We should profile Muslims, or anyone who looks like he or she could conceivably be Muslim, and we should be honest about it."- zio-atheist, Sam Harris. //www.samharris.org/blog/item/in-defense-of-profiling (paragraph 9)------------------------------------Neurolinguistically programmed Harris devotees display selective amnesia when it comes to their demigod Harris.If zio-monkey fails to accept what is under his nose for evidence (2), there's little point wasting time citing evidence (1).
+Islam Moodliar 1) gay rights in the quran? i'd like to see2) "Harris reckons Muslims should be profiled" when did he say that?Sam Harris (and people like him) are the only hope for the betterment and equality in the muslim world. He is a hero of theirs, regardless if they understand it or not
+chris kozubHarris plagiarizes his stuff from Pamela Geller and fox news, by the sounds of it. And "thought experiments" based on selective pew polls.He's a passive-aggressive, reactionary in the little league of thinkers. He's not a big thinker, he's moronic. Any fool can see he's not kosher.Even Chomsky thinks he's a freak.And Noam is far from being an Islamist.But you zio-atheists still cry and wet your knickers over this idiot Harris.
+chris kozubHarris is a zio-atheist. I presume you are one of his neurolinguistically programmed devotees.So what if this guy plagiarized. Big deal. Who are you? Mr Academia?
You like this guy because he refuses to point the finger at your faith. Understand though that he's lair plagiarist fraud. You Muslims hate anyone who criticizes your faith. Harris actually has your back but your islamic pride will not allow you to see it.
Stone Cold Steve Austin shoots on the Steiner brothers
Like. Comment. Subscribe! More Podcasts posted DAILY!