Theology—beneficial or source of endless debating?

[DavidTree]

Catholicism has had an agenda since Vatican II—if not to unite Islam with Catholicism—to at least welcome Muslims (and others) as brothers and sisters:

"But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place among whom are the Muslims: these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day."​

​

"The Church, therefore, urges her sons to enter with prudence and charity into discussion and collaboration with members of other religions. Let Christians, while witnessing to their own faith and way of life, acknowledge, preserve and encourage the spiritual and moral truths found among non-Christians, also their social life and culture."​

What we see here is nothing less than a complete corruption of the truths of Christianity. What this does essentially is to extend the right hand of fellowship to anyone who acknowledges the Creator.

1) According to Vatican II, the "plan of salvation" now includes everyone and anyone. It says that even though Muslims reject Jesus as the Son of God they still see Him as a prophet and apparently this is enough for them to join the club.

2) Under this arrangement, Catholicism is essentially putting themselves on the same plane with every other false religion. At least they're willing to admit it.

3) Catholics are now encouraged to enter not only into fellowship, but collaboration, with other religions. This no doubt includes Protestants and every other group or person who acknowledges the Creator. Did someone say ecumenism? The goal of this is painfully obvious—to spread Catholicism under the guise of false unity and fellowship.

See here. There's a long list of other agenda items: https://www.usccb.org/committees/ec...rs/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-islam

"Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds."—2 John 1:9-11

In other words, when a person enters into collaboration with those who bring false doctrine, you yourself share in their evil.

Their unholy trinity would be Catholicism, Islam, Judaism and these Three embracing the rest of the world who all acknowledge their creator.
OR
We can be heading for something much BIGGER then even these three.

"And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs coming out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet."
Revelation 16:13

"Now the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell." - Rev 16:19

 

[Magenta]

Their unholy trinity would be Catholicism, Islam, Judaism and these Three
embracing the rest of the world who all acknowledge their creator.
OR
We can be heading for something much BIGGER then even these three.

"And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs coming out of the mouth of the dragon,
out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet."
Revelation 16:13

"Now the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell." - Rev 16:19

You may have quoted the same Scripture verse to me yesterday in relation to something else

Having to do with frogs (the verse) now made me wonder, being
reminded of that particular plague visited upon the Egyptians

So I looked up what frogs signified to them (Egyptians), since I understand that each plague
dealt with the associated false gods and goddesses, in order to show forth God's supremacy
and power over them. The frog goddess was Heqet (or Heket) and is believed to be the origin
of the Greek goddess Hecate, she of witchcraft. Heqet was originally the female counterpart
to Khnum, and together they "oversaw" matters of fertility, childbirth, and even resurrection.

 

[DavidTree]

You may have quoted the same Scripture verse to me yesterday in relation to something else

Having to do with frogs (the verse) now made me wonder, being
reminded of that particular plague visited upon the Egyptians

So I looked up what frogs signified to them (Egyptians), since I understand that each plague
dealt with the associated false gods and goddesses, in order to show forth God's supremacy
and power over them. The frog goddess was Heqet (or Heket) and is believed to be the origin
of the Greek goddess Hecate, she of witchcraft. Heqet was originally the female counterpart
to Khnum, and together they "oversaw" matters of fertility, childbirth, and even resurrection.

Thank you for that info as sorcery and withcraft and indeed in play to deceive the kings of the earth.

Same 'Old Deception' from the "Serpent of Old, the Devil and Satan" = Revelation 20:2

HOWEVER, this 'Old Deception' comes 'RE-Packaged' = NEW IMPROVED Formula

The Apostle John saw three unclean spirits that 'looked like' frogs = they were not the frogs like in Egypt, only similiar looking.

T2T = Time2Think = What has been presented to the world in the past 70 years on national media as to what is coming - to be revealed.

P.S. - DO NOT take offense to T2T as you are 100% Thinker in the Word, with the Spirit, hungry for Truth

 

[Jocund]

No, this is not a heretical version of the Bible. That is how it reads. You are not a better scholar than the translators of the many translations.

You have no clout to make that determination about anyone else.

Read Gen 12:7. Now read Gal 3:16.

Do you not understand how Gal 3:16 is a reference to passages inclusive of Gen 12:7?

The pluralization of Gen 12:7's "seed" is done in contradiction to the clear context explained in Gal 3:16.

There is such a thing as a bad translation. There is such a thing as a heretical translation. The version of the Bible you are drawing from is heretical. As I said, look at the Hebrew source material, then look at Gal 3:16. Some translators intentionally try to create contradictions for the benefit of their own politics. Don't take my word for it, do the research yourself. Wake up.

Paul is using "seed" as an *allusion* to Christ, in much the same way that Joseph was an *allusion* to Christ. The literal "seed" of Abraham was Isaac and his progeny.

No. Paul was explaining that the promise was made to one literal seed (Christ). Within a Christian perspective, it is a mistranslation to suggest that there are multiple "seeds" included in the promise.

The "seed" of the promise is only Christ, and those in Christ.

If you are reading a Hebrew bible translated by a Talmudic Jewish team, it is not a heresy relative to their faith to translate Gen 12:7 as "descendants" but it is heresy from a Christian perspective to translate that as a plural.

Yes, I reject Replacement Theology which effectively replaces the nation Israel with the international Church.

You have it completely backwards. The promise is to those of the faith of Abraham, the faith of righteousness. Israel in the OT was contained as part of that faith of righteousness but Israel does not replace the faith of Abraham. The faith of Abraham is fulfilled in Christ, not replaced. The Israel that is saved is that Israel that becomes Christian in fulfilment of the faith of Abraham.

It is common to think of the Church as nation-less.

According to who? And even if you perceive it to currently be nationless, are you committed to the position that it is impossible for there to be a nation in Christ? Do Christians not rule with Christ in the 1000 year kingdom? Do Christians not reign with Christ in New Earth?

faith in Christ is the basis of our restoration to God's progeny.

Are you proposing that Israel will be a Christian nation? If so, is this to say that many Saul/Paul conversions will exist? And if so, will this conversion happen during their lifetime as it did for Saul/Paul, or are you proposing that salvation can be found after death?

I would never say that nationality alone determines sonship of God. But nationalities clearly is required in the promises of God.

Again, Abraham was promised to be the father of many nations but not that every one of those fathered nations would inherit the promise.

Universal Salvation of the Jewish People is not the issue. Only those who have faith in Christ will be saved in Israel.

Only Christians, yes, I agree. And those of Israel that turn to Christ become part of the Church. Paul is an example.

The point is, there *must* be an Israel in which people of faith ultimately dominate the nation.

Israel does not replace the faith of Abraham.

Christianity must eventually rule among the Jewish People in the nation of Israel.

The saved remnant of Israel will be Christian and therefore part of the Church, agreed.

I don't think you understand how Paul is using the term "seed." He is not de-literalizing the sense of Abraham's biological progeny.

The statement you are making is heretical. Paul clearly defines what Gen 12:7 means. Paul is clearly stating that the correct translation is "seed" not "seeds". There are instances where fleshly children are referenced, but the promise is through faith not flesh.

The Bible translators knew what they were doing. Interpretations are something different.

Again, we have to first look at whether it was a Talmudic Jewish translator, or a Christian translator. We also have to consider if there is a motive to skew and mistranslate in favour of politics.

I don't think you understand what I'm talking about. Gal 3:16 requires the word in Gen 12:7 to be translated as "seed" singular despite the fact that just like "sheep" or "fish" that word under different contexts could be translated as a plural. All good old translations show "seed"/"offspring" etc. in singular.

 

[Magenta]

You have no clout to make that determination about anyone else.

But you do?

You are reading from a heretical version of the Bible.

 

[Magenta]

Paul is using "seed" as an *allusion* to Christ,

No. Paul was explaining that the promise was made to one literal seed (Christ).

You are saying the same thing but disagreeing anyways?

 

[ResidentAlien]

There is such a thing as a bad translation. There is such a thing as a heretical translation.

What translation is the heretical one and which one should we be using?

 

[DavidTree]

You have no clout to make that determination about anyone else.

Read Gen 12:7. Now read Gal 3:16.

Do you not understand how Gal 3:16 is a reference to passages inclusive of Gen 12:7?

The pluralization of Gen 12:7's "seed" is done in contradiction to the clear context explained in Gal 3:16.

There is such a thing as a bad translation. There is such a thing as a heretical translation. The version of the Bible you are drawing from is heretical. As I said, look at the Hebrew source material, then look at Gal 3:16. Some translators intentionally try to create contradictions for the benefit of their own politics. Don't take my word for it, do the research yourself. Wake up.



No. Paul was explaining that the promise was made to one literal seed (Christ). Within a Christian perspective, it is a mistranslation to suggest that there are multiple "seeds" included in the promise.

The "seed" of the promise is only Christ, and those in Christ.

If you are reading a Hebrew bible translated by a Talmudic Jewish team, it is not a heresy relative to their faith to translate Gen 12:7 as "descendants" but it is heresy from a Christian perspective to translate that as a plural.



You have it completely backwards. The promise is to those of the faith of Abraham, the faith of righteousness. Israel in the OT was contained as part of that faith of righteousness but Israel does not replace the faith of Abraham. The faith of Abraham is fulfilled in Christ, not replaced. The Israel that is saved is that Israel that becomes Christian in fulfilment of the faith of Abraham.



According to who? And even if you perceive it to currently be nationless, are you committed to the position that it is impossible for there to be a nation in Christ? Do Christians not rule with Christ in the 1000 year kingdom? Do Christians not reign with Christ in New Earth?



Are you proposing that Israel will be a Christian nation? If so, is this to say that many Saul/Paul conversions will exist? And if so, will this conversion happen during their lifetime as it did for Saul/Paul, or are you proposing that salvation can be found after death?




Again, Abraham was promised to be the father of many nations but not that every one of those fathered nations would inherit the promise.



Only Christians, yes, I agree. And those of Israel that turn to Christ become part of the Church. Paul is an example.



Israel does not replace the faith of Abraham.



The saved remnant of Israel will be Christian and therefore part of the Church, agreed.



The statement you are making is heretical. Paul clearly defines what Gen 12:7 means. Paul is clearly stating that the correct translation is "seed" not "seeds". There are instances where fleshly children are referenced, but the promise is through faith not flesh.



Again, we have to first look at whether it was a Talmudic Jewish translator, or a Christian translator. We also have to consider if there is a motive to skew and mistranslate in favour of politics.

I don't think you understand what I'm talking about. Gal 3:16 requires the word in Gen 12:7 to be translated as "seed" singular despite the fact that just like "sheep" or "fish" that word under different contexts could be translated as a plural. All good old translations show "seed"/"offspring" etc. in singular.

It's been 2,000 Years of indoctrination to focus on the natural over that which the LORD intended from the Beginning.

Thus the Apostle Peter said:
"Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures."
2 Peter ch3

We are all coming 'out of' Babylon as we Hear and Respond to the Call.
All of us have to 'untwist' our minds that were wrapped around religion.
No one can claim full understanding but we can submit to "it is written".

 

[pottersclay]

The blindness would certainly apply to the Saul/Pauls of the world, but not to every descendant of Israel. Not all of Israel are Israel. Not all that call themselves Jews are Jews.

Do you disagree?

Lets get to the bottom line here. I dont know where you live but here in the states we have freedom of religion.
It is very rare and mostly with the cult religions such as mormon or Mennonite in some cases jw that shun there own for not keeping to there faith and traditions.
The jewish culture is different. Extreme sometimes to say the least. They do disown there own, even sometimes to death.
They start teaching at a very young age. Their feasts and holidays is observed by the whole community.
Whether blood line or not it is enbreaded in them. That on top of spiritual blindness and fear of retaliation from there own even family members makes for a great task for them to see the light.
If we in the states adopted half of their ways in our christian up bringing this nation would be far better off.
Many christians dont even know their faith is founded deep in Judaism. They act and talk like Jesus created a new religion. Some have never read the old testament mostly because they were taught that God was through with the jews
...Not so.
Replacement theology was preached from the pulpit and in some cases still is.
We dont need a mans theory we need a savior Jesus Christ. Who was and is a jew.
All of the new testament was written by jews. Jews inspired by GOD how to be christian. How ironic.
Referring to the old forbidden testament showing the fulfillment of Gods word.
Talk about blindness and finger pointing and dividing my gosh how guilty are we all.
The Lord has laid it upon my heart to search out the truth this is my mission not to divide but to bring together
By his word jew and gentile alike in one accord.

 

[XavierJesusLovesIndia]

Former RCC member here, Revelations ch12 is not speaking of Mary.

Hi David.

Ok, so if Revelation 12 is not speaking of Mary, who is it speaking of? Eve? Sarah? Deborah? Elizabeth? Salome? Mary Magdalene?

Imo, vs 5 makes it clear: "And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a a rod of iron (Psa 2:9): and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne." That Son is clearly Jesus, as the reference to Psa 2:9 also makes clear. Which woman gave physical birth to Jesus? Clearly, only Mary, not Sarah or Eve or Salome or Elizabeth etc.

When we ask another Living Blood Sanctified Saint to pray, with or for us, it is a Living Blessing from the LORD to do so.

I agree with this.

However, to be dependent upon another flawed human being to intercede on our behalf is in itself flawed.

I don't depend on the Saints. I depend on Lord Jesus Christ. But, just as I believe in Him as my Lord and Savior, I love all the Saints He has raised up over time. The Bible commends this and doesn't speak against it.

Eph 1:15 "Therefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints, 16do not cease to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers:" How would you understand this passage, David?

Praying to Mary, the Apostles or dead saints is sin because it denies the TRUTH.

We don't pray to Mary, strictly speaking. We ask her to pray for us, just as you would ask your mother to pray for you. We ask the Apostles to pray for us just as you would ask your Pastors to pray for you. Rev 5:8 speaks of the prayers of the Saints offered in Heaven.

Rev 5:8 "And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints."

God Bless.

 

[XavierJesusLovesIndia]

No, I said what I meant. Catholics think they're Christians but unfortunately they're sadly deceived.

You can say whatever you like, but you cannot prove it. I gave you the historical evidence that the Catholic Church began in the 1st Century. Now, let me give you the Biblical Evidence that Catholics are Christian and saved by God's Grace through faith in Jesus Christ.

Rom 10:

"9that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For with your heart you believe and are justified, and with your mouth you confess and are saved.

11It is just as the Scripture says: “Anyone who believes in Him will never be put to shame.”e 12For there is no difference between Jew and Greek: The same Lord is Lord of all, and gives richly to all who call on Him, 13for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

We confess Jesus is Lord and God, which the Apostle Paul says no one can do without the Holy Spirit. Therefore, we have the Holy Spirit. No non-Christian religion confesses Jesus Christ as Lord and God. Catholics do, therefore we are not a non-Christian religion.

You never answered and I'm still curious why you picked a forum that clearly states as a matter of policy that Catholicism is heresy. What possible motive could you have other than to push your false unity narrative?

Well, firstly, I didn't read every thread, but only a few, before signing up. So I didn't see that particular thread you mentioned until recently when somebody (you?) bumped it. Secondly, as I understand it, Catholics are considered to be in serious error, but can sign up and post, and other Christians can show us, from the Word of God, how exactly we are wrong. So you're free to do that if you wish.

This was my first post when I joined up, and I stand by it:

Hallelujah! All Glory, Honor, and Praise be to Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ now and forever!

I am Nishant Xavier, an Indian Christian, from Tamil Nadu, India. I studied in National Institute of Technology, Trichy, and Indian Institute of Management, Lucknow. I worked for Bank of New York, (Chennai Office) for a couple of years earlier, and now work for Credit Suisse, an Investment Banking Company in Mumbai. I Work from Home from Chennai, Tamil Nadu. I am a Catholic Christian, but I love all Christians everywhere from all denominations as my brothers and sisters in Our Lord Jesus Christ. I almost Married a Pentecostal Christian Lady. I I have great dreams for the Salvation and Economic Blessings from Our Lord Jesus for my country India. My aspiration and hope is we Indian Christians win at least 15 Crore (150 MN) for Christ in India by 2030:

Tamil Nadu is also where St. Thomas, the Apostle of Jesus Christ, labored for the Salvation of so many Souls, brought many to Holy Baptism and to Saving Faith in Jesus Christ, Our Lord and Saviour, and is buried to this day. If any of you are from India or come to India, call me if you want and we can go to St. Thomas' Mount together on a Saturday or Sunday! I've also been to St. Francis Xavier's tomb in Goa with my College Friends. St. Francis Xavier is another Great Christian respected by all Christian Denominations who according to some sources I've read won 3 Million (30 Lakh) Souls to Our Lord Jesus and to Holy Baptism. I also respect British Christians and the Anglican Denomination for the Good Work they did, for Christ and for India, for so many centuries.

Today, it's up to us Indian Christians, My Brothers and Sisters in Our Lord Jesus Christ, to Continue the Mission, and Complete the Task! Let us Pray, and let us Work, with Fire and with Zeal, with Full Christian Unity, to end Persecution of Christians in Our Motherland India, and to Win Lakhs and Crores to Salvation in Jesus Christ Our Lord, the Only Name under Heaven by which we can be saved, as St. Peter the Apostle plainly teaches (Acts 4: 12). "Acts 4:12 "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. " Hallelujah!

May Our Lord Jesus Christ Richly Bless us all, with His Blessings and His Grace, so that we may have Deep Faith in Him and Strong Love for Him, and desire to do great things for His Eternal Glory. In Lord Jesus' Name. Amen.

Will get back to the others later. God Bless.

 

[Jocund]

Replacement theology was preached from the pulpit and in some cases still is.

Israel does not replace the faith of Abraham.

By his word jew and gentile alike in one accord.

In Christ.

Referring to the old forbidden testament showing the fulfillment of Gods word

2 Cor 3:14

 

[ResidentAlien]

You can say whatever you like, but you cannot prove it.

I'm not out to prove anything. I'm simply here to call you out. I've posted a video of Francis praying to a Mary idol. I posted a link to an article with pictures showing Francis worshipping a baby Jesus idol. I posted a link which shows very clearly the false unity plans of Vatican II. Believe me, there's much more I could say and post, which I may do. I know the standard line: No, you simply don't understand. Let me tell you what Francis is really doing. This sort of thing is what very clever conmen say to their marks: Don't believe your own eyes and ears but believe what I'm telling you.

I gave you the historical evidence that the Catholic Church began in the 1st Century.

I must've missed it, but if you're talking about Peter being the first pope, that's so laughable even a first grader could see that its complete nonsense. But I must say, this really doesn't speak very highly of the intelligence of all the people who have bought into it.

This was my first post when I joined up, and I stand by it:

That's right, from the get-go your intention to push the false unity narrative has been very clear.

 

[DavidTree]

Hi David.

Ok, so if Revelation 12 is not speaking of Mary, who is it speaking of? Eve? Sarah? Deborah? Elizabeth? Salome? Mary Magdalene?

Imo, vs 5 makes it clear: "And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a a rod of iron (Psa 2:9): and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne." That Son is clearly Jesus, as the reference to Psa 2:9 also makes clear. Which woman gave physical birth to Jesus? Clearly, only Mary, not Sarah or Eve or Salome or Elizabeth etc.



I agree with this.



I don't depend on the Saints. I depend on Lord Jesus Christ. But, just as I believe in Him as my Lord and Savior, I love all the Saints He has raised up over time. The Bible commends this and doesn't speak against it.

Eph 1:15 "Therefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints, 16do not cease to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers:" How would you understand this passage, David?



We don't pray to Mary, strictly speaking. We ask her to pray for us, just as you would ask your mother to pray for you. We ask the Apostles to pray for us just as you would ask your Pastors to pray for you. Rev 5:8 speaks of the prayers of the Saints offered in Heaven.

Rev 5:8 "And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints."

God Bless.

Eph 1:15 only refers to Living Saints who are Alive on earth = not the ones who have died.

Rev 5:8 are the prayers of the saints, throughout all time, who walked the earth lifting up prayer daily to the LORD.

The woman in Revelation tells us who she is = "Now a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a garland of twelve stars."

She is = "but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all." - Galatians ch4

Next = "Then the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there one thousand two hundred and sixty days."

There is the Spiritual and then there is the natural.

We are Born-Again from Above = the Spiritual
We are on earth when we are Born-Again = the natural/physical

 

[DavidTree]

Hi David.

Ok, so if Revelation 12 is not speaking of Mary, who is it speaking of? Eve? Sarah? Deborah? Elizabeth? Salome? Mary Magdalene?

Imo, vs 5 makes it clear: "And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a a rod of iron (Psa 2:9): and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne." That Son is clearly Jesus, as the reference to Psa 2:9 also makes clear. Which woman gave physical birth to Jesus? Clearly, only Mary, not Sarah or Eve or Salome or Elizabeth etc.



I agree with this.



I don't depend on the Saints. I depend on Lord Jesus Christ. But, just as I believe in Him as my Lord and Savior, I love all the Saints He has raised up over time. The Bible commends this and doesn't speak against it.

Eph 1:15 "Therefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints, 16do not cease to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers:" How would you understand this passage, David?



We don't pray to Mary, strictly speaking. We ask her to pray for us, just as you would ask your mother to pray for you. We ask the Apostles to pray for us just as you would ask your Pastors to pray for you. Rev 5:8 speaks of the prayers of the Saints offered in Heaven.

Rev 5:8 "And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints."

God Bless.

Eph 1:15 only refers to Living Saints who are Alive on earth = not the ones who have died.

Rev 5:8 are the prayers of the saints, throughout all time, who walked the earth lifting up prayer daily to the LORD.

The woman in Revelation tells us who she is = "Now a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a garland of twelve stars."

She is = "but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all." - Galatians ch4

Next = "Then the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there one thousand two hundred and sixty days."

There is the Spiritual and then there is the natural.

We are Born-Again from Above = the Spiritual
We are on earth when we are Born-Again = the natural/physical

Mary was never created to be "queen of heaven" = that is idolatry from Egypt and Babylon

So he carried me away in the Spirit into the wilderness. And I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the filthiness of her fornication. And on her forehead a name was written:
MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT,
THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS
AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS
OF THE EARTH.

I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. And when I saw her, I marveled with great amazement.

The Vatican sits on the seven hills of pagan Rome:
The Romans said that their capital city, Roma, was situated on seven hills. Depending on how one defines a hill, there are more, but the Romans gave names to seven: Esquiline, Palatine, Aventine, Capitoline, Quirinal, Viminal, and Caelian.

 

[pottersclay]

Israel does not replace the faith of Abraham.



In Christ.



2 Cor 3:14

Your religion blinds you🤐😮

 

[Jocund]

Your religion blinds you🤐😮

My religion is Christianity. Which religion do you believe in?

 

[ResidentAlien]

So I didn't see that particular thread you mentioned until recently when somebody (you?) bumped it.

Nope, sorry, wasn't me.

 

[pottersclay]

John list a few theologies

 

[Magenta]

2 Cor 3:14

But their minds were closed. For to this day the same veil remains at the reading of
the old covenant. It has not been lifted, because only in Christ can it be removed.