Catholic Heresy (for the record)

[notuptome]

Luke 6:13

And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles;


Matthew 28:16-20The Great Commission

[SUP]16 [/SUP]Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. [SUP]17 [/SUP]When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. [SUP]18 [/SUP]Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. [SUP]19 [/SUP]Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, [SUP]20 [/SUP]and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Right here in the great commission our Lord Jesus gave them the right to appoint others.
Disciple means follower of Jesus, apostle is a disciple who holds a leadership role in the church. In Psalms that Peter refers back to it shows that when one has fallen they are to act and appoint another to fill that spot.
You said God already chose Saul, this is incorrect for Saul ( Paul ) was not chosen tell later.

Are you operating in your own understanding?

Yes our commission is to make disciples of the believers. There is nothing about appointing apostles. Eph 4:11 God gifts apostles to the church along with evangelists and pastor-teachers. I do believe that the office of apostle and prophet are no longer active especially in the context that we see them in the OT and the early church.

The Psalm to which you refer is prophetic and is Gods promise to accomplish the ministry of establishing His church. God is not bound by the constraints of time and His appointment of Saul was determined long before the world was established.

I've seen others use that very same Psalm to pray for someone to fill a political office. They misuse the scripture just like Peter did that day. I do not think Peter was anything but his usual impulsive self when he did it so I attribute no malice to Peter.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[kennethcadwell]

Are you operating in your own understanding?

Yes our commission is to make disciples of the believers. There is nothing about appointing apostles. Eph 4:11 God gifts apostles to the church along with evangelists and pastor-teachers. I do believe that the office of apostle and prophet are no longer active especially in the context that we see them in the OT and the early church.

The Psalm to which you refer is prophetic and is Gods promise to accomplish the ministry of establishing His church. God is not bound by the constraints of time and His appointment of Saul was determined long before the world was established.

I've seen others use that very same Psalm to pray for someone to fill a political office. They misuse the scripture just like Peter did that day. I do not think Peter was anything but his usual impulsive self when he did it so I attribute no malice to Peter.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

First of all we don't make disciples from believers.
If you are a disciple, you are already a believer. You go and take non-believers and turn them into disciples, preaching the word and helping them to see there need to come to repentance in accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior and turning from that willful sins they commit.

Peter did not misuse that scripture in Psalms, Jesus gave him the authority to carry on the church and build on it.
You can not carry it on with out keeping people in leadership roles, Peter was charged to lead the ministry here on earth.
Paul was called to be the main apostle to lead the ministry out to the gentile nations.

Like I said the apostles were also disciples ( followers of Jesus ) the reason they were called apostles was because they were given the leadership roles of the ministry to spread the gospel here on earth. When they passed, the following disciples under them were then charged to take up the vacant leadership roles.

 

[Christ-Today]

Well said brother.

 

[notuptome]

First of all we don't make disciples from believers.
If you are a disciple, you are already a believer. You go and take non-believers and turn them into disciples, preaching the word and helping them to see there need to come to repentance in accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior and turning from that willful sins they commit.

Wow! This is idiotic. We do not make disciples from unbelievers. You must be a believer before you can become a disciple. You are slobbering around in church gobbilty-gook. If I were to hazard a guess I would say you've never lead anyone to the Lord in the direct sense of seeing them saved. [/quote]

Peter did not misuse that scripture in Psalms, Jesus gave him the authority to carry on the church and build on it.
You can not carry it on with out keeping people in leadership roles, Peter was charged to lead the ministry here on earth.
Paul was called to be the main apostle to lead the ministry out to the gentile nations.

Yeah like that would have been so out of character for Peter to leap before he looked. James was the leader of the church at Jerusalem not Peter. You are not getting the up-drift of the scriptures again. Jesus is the foundation of the church not Peter and the keys to the kingdom is the word of God.

Like I said the apostles were also disciples ( followers of Jesus ) the reason they were called apostles was because they were given the leadership roles of the ministry to spread the gospel here on earth. When they passed, the following disciples under them were then charged to take up the vacant leadership roles.

Jesus never told the disciples to appoint apostles. God alone gifts apostles to the church. Eph 4:11 You are now following the doctrines of men not of God. All believers are called to be witnesses of the saving grace of God.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[sealabeag]

Wow! This is idiotic. We do not make disciples from unbelievers. You must be a believer before you can become a disciple. You are slobbering around in church gobbilty-gook. If I were to hazard a guess I would say you've never lead anyone to the Lord in the direct sense of seeing them saved.

:O ..............................

 

[notuptome]

:O ..............................

Oops too blunt??

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Maynard]

Oops too blunt??

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Nah, just so utterly misguided actually, Roger.

That's one of the many dangers of Protestantism. Everyone interpreting scripture for themselves, therefore ending up with 1000's upon 1000's of false teachings which inevitably lead people off in just as many different directions (just spend a day at christianchat.com). No one possibly able to agree with one another. Each ending up instead ignorantly creating God in their own image, making Jesus what they want him to be instead of understanding who he actually is, all because they lack any proper teaching. Very sad, and very dangerous.

30,000+ different denominations, each teaching something different. Protestantism is a ship without a rudder, to put it mildly.

 

[didymos]

QUOTE=Maynard;1675752](...)
That's one of the many dangers of Protestantism. Everyone interpreting scripture for themselves (...) [/QUOTE]

True, no need for people to have their own opinions, they should just accept 'papal BULL.'

 

[ThomistColin]

And if I responded, yes they should accept "Papal Bull"? (And that is my opinion.)

 

[Maynard]

^ HAHA! Benedict ROCKS!

 

[kennethcadwell]

Wow! This is idiotic. We do not make disciples from unbelievers. You must be a believer before you can become a disciple. You are slobbering around in church gobbilty-gook. If I were to hazard a guess I would say you've never lead anyone to the Lord in the direct sense of seeing them saved.

Yeah like that would have been so out of character for Peter to leap before he looked. James was the leader of the church at Jerusalem not Peter. You are not getting the up-drift of the scriptures again. Jesus is the foundation of the church not Peter and the keys to the kingdom is the word of God.

Jesus never told the disciples to appoint apostles. God alone gifts apostles to the church. Eph 4:11 You are now following the doctrines of men not of God. All believers are called to be witnesses of the saving grace of God.

For the cause of Christ
Roger[/QUOTE]

Just like Maynard said, you are misguided.
The gentiles were unbelievers when Paul was commissioned by our Lord to bring the gospel to all the gentile nations.
Same as the great commission the Apostles were not sent out to find other believers, they were sent out to make believers out of unbelievers, once you become a believer you are a disciple. Because a believer is a follower of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior which is what a disciple is.

 

[john17]

True, no need for people to have their own opinions, they should just accept 'papal BULL.'

It's OK to come up with *opinions*, just don't automatically elevate them and regard them as the *correct interpretations*. Trusting one's own opinion is the reason why we have 30,000+ Protestant denominations, almost no one is in agreement about essential things (baptismal regeneration, justification, trinitarian formula, incarnation, etc..) with one another. This is another symptom of today's Narcissism, where an interpretation is correct only if it pursuades *me*, convincing to *me*, etc. Hence this method elevates one's self, as if Truth is subject to one's taste. Ultimately, those who approach Scripture this way does not submit to Scripture, but to themselves. And whoever worship in a "church" whereby submission to the church was determined if the church is in agreement with his *own* interpretation of Scripture (that's why it is an expected practice for Protestants to go "church-shopping" everytime they have a falling-out with the current church they belong to), then he does not worship God, but himself. And if he can't find a church that is in agreement with *his own* beliefs about what the Scripture says, he'll just create a new church, believing that the Holy Spirit told him to do so.john17

 

[john17]

Come to think of it, how exactly did Satan deceive Eve? He did so in three steps. First he *belittled the authorized interpretation* of God's prohibition on their eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil by rhetorically questioning an exaggerated form of the prohibition: "Did God really say . . . any tree of the garden?" Second, he *offered an alternative interpretation to the authorized interpretation* , explaining that the prohibition was actually a divine test (which in fact it was), but that God actually wanted them to choose 'thinking for themselves' over 'blind obedience' to Him. In that way, claimed Satan, God's true desire was that the humans would discover to think for themselves and thus disobey the arbitrary prohibition and go ahead and eat from the tree. Thinking for themselves and going ahead and eating from the tree, claimed Satan, would amount to passing the test and lead to their being like God. (In actuality, however, if they had not eaten of the tree, they would have passed the divine test and truly become like God.) Third, he got Eve *to place herself in a position of deciding for herself whether the authorized interpretation or Satan's interpretation was better*. That is why Eve was examining the fruit in Gen 3:6, to see for herself whether it would kill her or make her like God. As soon as he got Eve to the third step (i.e. deciding for herself which interpretation was better), he had already accomplished his goal, because she was already at that point acting as her own ultimate authority, i.e. as if she had no ultimate authority. That was the same state that Lucifer was in. And so by bringing Eve into this same state, he was in fact getting her to follow him (while getting her to think she was following God and enticing her to trust herself), and ultimately putting her in bondage to sin and death. We also see this very same three-step process take place in the early life of Martin Luther, when he starts questioning the Church's doctrine, coming up with alternative interpretations of Scripture, and eventually puts himself in a position to decide for himself which interpretation is better. He thereby spurns the lawful Church authorities and makes himself his own Church authority. Just as separation and division between Adam and Eve (in shame) and Cain and Abel (in murder) were the fruit of Eve's deciding for herself which interpretation was better, so the numerous sects of Protestantism are the fruit of Luther's imitation of Eve.

 

[didymos]

^ HAHA! Benedict ROCKS! View attachment 87598

He does? Since when?
(How ironic yet accurate that you used an emoticon with devil's horns btw)

 

[notuptome]

Nah, just so utterly misguided actually, Roger.

That's one of the many dangers of Protestantism. Everyone interpreting scripture for themselves, therefore ending up with 1000's upon 1000's of false teachings which inevitably lead people off in just as many different directions (just spend a day at christianchat.com). No one possibly able to agree with one another. Each ending up instead ignorantly creating God in their own image, making Jesus what they want him to be instead of understanding who he actually is, all because they lack any proper teaching. Very sad, and very dangerous.

30,000+ different denominations, each teaching something different. Protestantism is a ship without a rudder, to put it mildly.

Little do you know. You rely upon Rome's standard classic diversionary tactic. True believers have the one and only sure and certain guide into the scriptures. The Holy Spirit the Vicar of Christ leads Christians into all the truth. One Spirit and one truth but many, many false beliefs. No matter how dearly held false beliefs have no virtue and there is no honor in them.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Katy-follower]

That's one of the many dangers of Protestantism. Everyone interpreting scripture for themselves, therefore ending up with 1000's upon 1000's of false teachings which inevitably lead people off in just as many different directions (just spend a day at christianchat.com). No one possibly able to agree with one another. Each ending up instead ignorantly creating God in their own image, making Jesus what they want him to be instead of understanding who he actually is, all because they lack any proper teaching. Very sad, and very dangerous.

30,000+ different denominations, each teaching something different. Protestantism is a ship without a rudder, to put it mildly.

You're misunderstanding SALVATIONAL versus NON SALVATIONAL topics.

Salvation is the most important one to get right. All born again believers on here are equally yoked and agree on the one true gospel. However, many differ on the non salvational topics, such as end times events, for example (some see the rapture as pre-trib and others as mid-trib). This is why you see different views on here. Non salvational topics have nothing to do with salvation.


Then you have a group of people on here who are not born of the Spirit and they do not believe the one true gospel. They will post in opposition to the gospel shared on here.


The reality is there are only 2 sides. One is God's side and the other is the enemy's side. There is the narrow road and the broad road, the sheep and the goats, the wheat and the tares. Both are in opposition when it comes to SALVATION, which is the important one. Non salvational topics have nothing to do with salvation.

 

[tribesman]

...Then you have a group of people on here who are not born of the Spirit and they do not believe the one true gospel. They will post in opposition to the gospel shared on here...

The Q is where we have the Roman Catholic Church as a system here.

 

[Elin]

We try to welcome everyone to our site including people who grow up with Catholic tradition because of course we want to lead people to the truth.

But sometimes it's perceived that we tolerate error and heresy. Please understand first of all that we don't screen every thread and post in this forum. YOU can help with that. If there's something that you really think we should deal with, then use the Report button (there's a Report button on every post). But please understand that there will be some error and we don't remove all error or even all heresy from the site, partly because it's an opportunity for Christians to correct it and respond with the word of God. But if there's too much of it or too much from one person then we do some housecleaning. We certainly don't want our site to be dominated by Catholic heresy or whatever heresy or error, and we don't want people to get the impression that we just tolerate all of that.

So for the record, Catholicism is heresy. That's what the admins of this site believe.

Mary WAS A SINNER.

She needed a savior, just like you and me.

She is NOT the "mother of God".

How do you address these Scriptures in the way "Lord" is used in the context?

Lk 1:44-45 - "As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears,
the baby in my womb leaped for joy.
Blesses is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished."

Lk 1:43 - "But why am I so favored that the mother of my Lord should come to me?"

Lk 1:46 - "And Mary said: 'My soul magnifies (glorifies) the Lord
and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior. . .
from now on all generations will call me blessed."

Don't mistake me as defending the Immaculate Conception of Mary
and particularly the egregious heresy of Mary as Co-Redemptrix.

But are we over-reacting to those heresies of man by denying Mary
at least as much respect as the apostles?

Should we be calling her the blessed mother, as Scripture states?

God has no mother, because God is God. Yes Jesus is God, and Mary was his mother, but we have to understand the dual nature of Jesus. He was 100% God yes, and also 100% man. Mary was his mother as a man, not as God. No where does the scripture refer to Mary as the "mother of God". And in fact, she's not even mentioned in all the epistles. All the New Testament instruction to the church is all about Jesus, not Mary. They never said "hail Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners". They always said JESUS .. JESUS... JESUS.

This is preaching to the choir for most people here. But it regularly happens that we start to accumulate Catholics here who really promote and argue their Catholicism, along with all the heresy.

So for the record, if anyone wants or needs to hear it, we don't agree with Catholic heresy. And yes it is heresy to exalt any other human being as sinless to the same level as Jesus (as the Catholics do with Mary -- they actually teach that Mary was sinless like Jesus!!!), and put equal focus on a person other than Jesus.

At the same time, we understand that no one is born a Christian. That's why Jesus said you must be born again. So we welcome all who are seeking -- Catholics, Muslims, homosexuals, and even protestants who are "Christian" only by tradition -- to experience our fellowship here on this site and learn the truth that Jesus is the way and the truth and the life and no one can come to the father except through Him. And there is only one God, and one mediator between God, the man Christ Jesus. Because he was both 100% man and 100% God, that makes him the perfect mediator between man and God. That's why the scripture also tells us to go straight to Jesus -- go to the throne of grace with confidence, knowing that he can understand our weaknesses and everything, since he lived as a man like us (and even experienced all temptation). Hence we don't need Mary to go to or go through -- that defeats the purpose of Jesus.

I saw my mother-in-law die before my eyes putting her faith in Mary. Days before she died I asked her if Mary can save her and she actually said yes. Then in her dying moments, my father-in-law pushed me in front of her to pray for her as she was dying before our eyes. I simply prayed out loud in front of everyone that she would put her faith in Jesus, and ONLY JESUS. There was protesting in the background "wala na Maria? wala na Maria?", which is Filipino language for "No Mary?? No Marry??". You see how deceived they all are. It is sad. You see how the devil uses that poison to add something to Jesus.

So I hope it's clear what we believe and we hope that we can promote the truth here in love.

 

[notuptome]

How do you address these Scriptures in the way "Lord" is used in the context?

Lk 1:44-45 - "As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears,
the baby in my womb leaped for joy.
Blesses is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished."

Lk 1:43 - "But why am I so favored that the mother of my Lord should come to me?"

Lk 1:46 - "And Mary said: 'My soul magnifies (glorifies) the Lord
and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior. . .
from now on all generations will call me blessed."

Don't mistake me as defending the Immaculate Conception of Mary
and particularly the egregious heresy of Mary as Co-Redemptrix.

But are we over-reacting to those heresies of man by denying Mary
at least as much respect as the apostles?

Should we be calling her the blessed mother, as Scripture states?

It was the hope of every Jewish woman that her first born child would be male and would be the Messiah. Is this the context in which Mary should be considered blessed?

What mother does not rejoice to hold in her arms a new born child? What mother does not rejoice to nurse her child? How could Mary not be blessed to hold in her arms the hope of all mankind?

I can only speculate what great wonders Mary beheld or what great sorrow Mary experienced when the son she cherished was hung on that old Roman cross.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[ThomistColin]

It was the hope of every Jewish woman that her first born child would be male and would be the Messiah. Is this the context in which Mary should be considered blessed?

What mother does not rejoice to hold in her arms a new born child? What mother does not rejoice to nurse her child? How could Mary not be blessed to hold in her arms the hope of all mankind?

I can only speculate what great wonders Mary beheld or what great sorrow Mary experienced when the son she cherished was hung on that old Roman cross.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

A sword pierced her heart! That's what she experienced when she saw her Son on the cross. And that is not speculation, it was prophecied when Jesus was brought to the Temple when He was a child.