Go Back   The Landover Baptist Church Forum > Church Forums > Catholic Superstition
Reload this Page Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians
Catholic Superstition The lies of the Catholic "church" exposed in light of the truth of Scripture

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
(#101)
Old
ApoplecticFalseChristian's Avatar
ApoplecticFalseChristian ApoplecticFalseChristian is offline
Unrepentant Papist Dog
Forum Member
 
Posts: 40
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Place of Legends
ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-12-2008, 09:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Mark 16:16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Pay attention to what that verse doesn't say. It doesn't say he that is not baptized shall be damned.

Notice that Eph 2:8-9 says For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:Not of works, lest any man should boast. It does NOT say ye are saved through faith AND BAPTISM.
Brother Billy, if you scan the entire bible looking for the word saved or its close synonyms one can put together a huge spread sheet of lots of different things that one MUST do (or NOT do) in order to be “saved”. This is the problem with over-reading scripture and trying to reduce it down to a few “salvation slogans” or distill down it al down to the five self-contradicting Protestant solas (that sound more like the 5 points of a secular-pentagram than they do apostolic teaching) that the Reformers came up with. This is exactly why Catholics are Christo-centric rather than purely bible-centric since we have to look at the “man” Jesus as the example of the Living Word of God to resolve some of the apparent contradictions that came out of Bible written by a multitude of inspired human writers. Please consider that the word “X AND Y” always means both X and Y in human logic. It’s very literal and clear. It is of course also important to understand the hermeneutics and the original audience and what the inspired writer was intending to say based on the surrounding context and chapters. I am sure none of this is new to you.

The key concept Catholics use to discern true apostolic teaching is to apply the simple truth that God’s word can never be divided against itself anymore so than the separate persons of the Trinity can be divided against The Godhead. God is harmony – apparent contradictions always mean someone is making improper assumptions. In other words we must take all of the Bible not just the parts that seem to work for the doctrinal beliefs one may want to hold to. Where there are apparent contradictions this means there is artifact arising out of erroneous human assumptions. It’s mostly common sense really. In other words Jesus also tells us we must OBEY him if we are to be saved. We are also told we MUST love God with our whole heart and soul if we are to be saved. We are told if we want to be perfect to sell everything and give to the poor. We are also told we must be merciful to others to receive mercy etc. Frankly we are told to do so many things that its pretty hard to be a perfect Christian isn’t brother? Do you imagine Jesus might me trying to tell us that none of can do it without His help? Also note, that if we are to obey Christ we must also obey those who He told us to follow – the apostles and their successors (The Catholic Bishops). We must also obey Him and trust Him when He says He wants us to be baptized. Will He make exceptions? Perhaps – Christ “the man” was a forgiving man and full of compassion. But Christ never told us anything that was trivial or not to our advantage. So why go against the clear indications that He wanted us to be baptized? Why put The Lord Your God to the test when its very easy to just obey Him here?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Irrelevant. There is nothing in this passage that states that baptism cleanses one of something called "original sin".

Repentence is the necessary condition.


I never claimed that baptism was meaningless. You are fighting your own strawmen.
Sorry I presumed a pastor had a through knowledge of the rest of scripture and this would be uncontested. Here are the scriptures that tell us about Original Sin. It is simple exegesis to see that Baptism is intended to remove it. But before I go there why do we need “saving” if we are not suffering from a fallen nature and sin in the first place?

Gen. 2:17 - the day you eat of that tree, you shall die.

Gen. 3:14-19 – Human’s are cursed by God (pain in childbirth, labor and toil etc.)

Job 14:1,4 – A clean thing can not come out of an unclean thing born of woman. All humans are afflicted with original sin.

Psalm 51:5 - We are all brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. Original Sin.

Rom. 5:12 - sin came into the world through one man, Adam, and death came through this sin. Original Sin.

Rom. 5:14 – Paul tells us death reigned from Adam to Moses, born from Adam's original sin.

Rom. 5:16 - the judgment following one single trespass brought condemnation for all. This is original sin – and why Christ came to save us.

Rom. 5:19 - by one man's disobedience many were made sinners. Original sin is passed on as part of the human condition, and only God in the flesh could atone for our sins by the eternal sacrifice of Himself. Through this sacrifice, God has re-opened the doors to heaven, and through baptism, we are once again made children of God.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
How about here:
Rom 3:28Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
That did not say, justified by faith AND BAPTISM.

Rom 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
That did not say, justified by faith AND BAPTISM.

Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
That did not say, justified by faith AND BAPTISM.
… etc.
These are all talking about justification. What you are not considering is that justification and sanctification are paired concepts and baptism is a part of it but is not all of it.

Here look at this:

Titus 3:8 - good deeds are profitable to men (just like the OT in 2 Tim. 3:16). Good deeds further justify us before God. This verse should be contrasted with

Titus 3:5, where we are not saved by works of righteousness “we have done.” In this verse what “we have done” refers to a work of law or obligation for which we seek payment. But verse 5 also says the “washing of regeneration” in reference to baptism saves, which is a work of grace, for which we are rewarded by God in Christ. There is a distinction between “works of law or obligation” and “works of grace.”

Ref: Titus 3:5 - justification is a generation of supernatural life in a former sinner. This means a real inner change or infusion (initially received at Baptism), not just putting on clean outer garments.

Acts 9:18; 22:16 - Why does Ananias command Saint Paul (who was directly chosen by Christ) to stand up and be baptized and "wash away" his sins? Because justification, as the apostolic Catholic Church has taught for 2,000 years, is ongoing. It is not a one-time event of accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior. Justification is freely given by God through faith, hope, love and the sacraments of the Church (e.g. baptism).

Again this is getting long so let me break here and continue with the rest of your comments a bit later.

God Bless,
ApostolicChristian


Matthew 16:18: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
2 Thess 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Reply With Quote
(#102)
Old
ApoplecticFalseChristian's Avatar
ApoplecticFalseChristian ApoplecticFalseChristian is offline
Unrepentant Papist Dog
Forum Member
 
Posts: 40
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Place of Legends
ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-12-2008, 11:49 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel Bathfire View Post
You have attracted the attention of Pastor Billy-Reuben and I and as such, I appreciate that there is much work in it for you; I’m sure the good Pastor will not mind if I include him in my thanks for sharing with us your views, however misguided they may be.
Hey EzBath, if will pardon the warm argo I will pardon the work. You have an interesting manner that shows some character and wit which I find less perspiring as I do entertaining. I normally except to see an inverse relationship in expressive power and IQ with those inclined to take refuge in running with the literalistic pups and their various ilk. Interesting...

[quote=Ezekiel Bathfire;262179]
We have a thread going on the Order of Melchizedek (although the original correspondent is confused to say the least.) In that thread I remarked that little is known of the remarkable Melchizedek. Thus, to claim such succession when the rites were never written in The Bible, is quite remarkable![/quite]
But of course you know that "the bible" is hardly holistic with respect to what we know of history and the early church and even ancient Jewish times. A fact easily attested to by a simple visit to the Vatican archives where we have literally hundreds of miles of books and manuscripts all nicely cataloged. There are afterall advantages to being a 2,000 year old religious faith community.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel Bathfire View Post
I think there are very few catholics, and certainly none that I have ever met, who honestly believe that the bread turns to flesh and the wine to blood. Elsewhere on these boards, I have discussed the matter and no intelligent person could accept Christ’s words as other than requesting remembrance. I realize that if you are catholic you are required to accept this privately and I do not expect that you will say otherwise, even under your nomme de guerre.
This is of course highly dubious anecdotal evidence. I have yet to meet a single Catholic who did not believe earnestly and with all their soul in real presence under the appearance, or was say "the accident" of wine and bread. Perhaps you are conversing with the Lutherans and Anglicans and their various derivatives who often confuse themselves as "catholics" simply because the recite our original Catholic Creed that attests to belief in the Holy Catholic Church. These poor souls are so confused that they profess a faith in The Catholic Church while protesting it as they eat a memorial of crackers and drink grape-juice then feed the left overs to the birds after the services. But if you want to talk to a real Catholic come to any Catholic Church world wide where there are over a billion Catholics who will tell you to your face "Amen" when the priest holds up the Eucharist and says "Body of Christ" and bow their heads in reverence and retire in silent meditation to contemplate this great commandment of Jesus.
If you know your bible you know that those that rejected Jesus' teaching on real presence are mentioned quite appropriately in John 6:66 as false followers of Christ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel Bathfire View Post
Wrong on both counts – history is against you and we are required to judge: Proverbs 31:9 Open thy mouth, judge righteously, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. Take your choice.
Rather selective are you not? Shall we see who can unholster their KJV faster? Here, let me put down my 15 shot Italian Beretta and just take my 6 shots at 3 paces to be fair...

Mattthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

Luke 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven

Romans 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

1 Cor 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

Romans 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

1 Cor 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?

:smokinggun:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel Bathfire View Post
Kate, I believe thou doest protest too much…Hmmm… historically, Baptists were outside that one. In any case, does it help a sinner to say that others have sinned also? I think not.
Actually Baptists are historically too late to the rebellious tea-party to be considered initiated into the original heresy but southern and earthy sassafras root is a poor substitute for the lordy Earl Grey tannins.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel Bathfire View Post
That is because Baptist pastors are just that – pastors. They know their flock and they are equal before God. It is merely that pastors are people who have followed the apostolic tradition of going out into the world and spreading the Word.
Here you depart from good sense as well as a sense of perspective. Jesus commissioned only the apostles to spread the good news; and they only those hand picked and apostolically blessed with an authority to teach. Baptist pastors are not authorized teachers of the gospel and are self appointed. Spreading the franchise is hardly the same as spreading The Word.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel Bathfire View Post
so you admit that the catholic church abandoned the original democracy and instituted a “who best toes the party line” approach – very Stalinist!
Neither truth nor salvation was never subject to a majority rule. In fact Jesus warned us about majorities and told us that 'wide is the path that leads the MANY to destruction'. It seems to me that the minority view being counter intuitive is the safer course. I take it you approve then of the Mohammedan Obama as your leader?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel Bathfire View Post
No one knows what that rite was! And that’s another thing. Note what the bible says about the laying on of hands – it must have taken all of 3 minutes now look at the unholy fuss the catholic church makes of this – a mockery if ever I saw one!
Some of you people should be so honorable to your parents to thank them for spending the 3 minutes of marital embrace to bring you into the world. Life can be given or taken in even less time.

Catholics know the rite and have been doing it for 2,000 years and others have not been able to find it because this is information that comes to us through Sacred Tradition - the same kind that the bibles tells us to conform to.

2 Thes 2;15 (KJV)
15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel Bathfire View Post
No, it is some 10th century idiot’s idea of what might impress the peasants – shame on you and your church!
Unsubstantiated polemics.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel Bathfire View Post
Whoa! Hold it rght there! At least you are honest enough to use the word “almost.” You now see the broad path down which Satan leads you!.
Almost - in the sense that Jesus is no longer present. I suppose Baptists have held to the tradition of holding nightly masses in the catecombs under the leadership of torch bearers.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel Bathfire View Post
there now follows a large list of exceptions which indicates to the intelligent person that there is, in fact, a huge concept of rank.
But not so large and no different than the early church which had bishops, priests and deacons - but not in those exact same English names of course. If you have the intelligence to follow the word etymology you will see that its a one to one correspondence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezekiel Bathfire View Post
"What I think" is where I come to my earlier “aside” You use the following to support the rule that Catholic bishops should not be married: Matt. 19:11-12 - Matt. 19:29 - Matt. 22:30 - 1 Cor 7:1 – 1 Cor. 7:7 - 1 Cor. 7:27 – 1 Cor. 7:32-33, 38 - 1 Tim. 3:2 - 1 Tim. 4:3 - 1 Tim. 5:9-12 - 2 Tim. 2:3-4 - Rev. 14:4, Isaiah 56:3-7, Jer. 16:1-4.

I use the clearest guidance possible 1Tm:3:1-5. Ihave done mine in a paragraph, yours requires acres of print and many opinions.

Admit it, the Catholic church has it wrong here. Earlier there was no requirement for any clergy to be celibate, I believe it was around the 11th century that the church was having trouble with inheritance of its lands, it therefore decided that clergy should be celibate and that there livings revert to the church.

You cannot serve God and Mammon – why was this decision made and whom does the catholic church worship?

Edit: I see Brother Ahimaaz has joined us. Brother Ahimaaz has an excellent mind; you will enjoy his comments.
But in using the simpleton form of reason you ignore the preponderance of scriptural evidence that contradicts your position. How convenient. The principal of Ocam's Razor only works if one is not so incompetent (or so clever and self defeating) to decapitate oneself or cut one's own throat.

What I will admit to is that there is no hard requirement for a bishop or priest to be married. But it is permissible for the bishops to elect to permit a married person to be ordained. The Catholic Church has elected of its own accord to not ordinarily permit married men so as to prevent a division of service and conflict in time to administer to church and personal family at the same time. Our priests and bishops work 24/7 attending to emergencies and high demands on their time. That is too much stress to a marriage and in their wisdom the bishops and the pope have elected to generally disallow marriage. There are a few special cases of converting Anglican priests who are already married who we permit to be ordained if they take a conditional oath of celibacy if their wife's should die.

ApostolicChristian


Matthew 16:18: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
2 Thess 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Reply With Quote
(#103)
Old
Pastor Billy-Reuben's Avatar
Pastor Billy-Reuben Pastor Billy-Reuben is offline
Senior Pastor
VP of Evangelical Outreach
On FIRE for Jesus
True Christian™

One Year/1000 posts Saved 1 Year Saved 5 Years 1st Year Bible College 2nd Year Bible College 3rd Year Bible College Saved 10 Years 4th Year Bible College 2008 Witch Hunt Award Long service medal, 1st class Christian Love True Christian™ The Al E. Pistle Award for Excellence in Rebuking Tithing Manager True Christian Provider™ award Ribfest '02 Real American™ Senior Pastor Heaven Bound TC Bravery Protected by JESUS Pastor of GOD Ex-Masturbator Super Soaker Baptism Award Ready for the Rapture True Christian Caucasian The Lord’s Witness Wound Jailed for JESUS Teabag Patriot Friend of Jesus Flat Earth Tell her once Persecuted Pro-Life Eats the Most Pork True Republican Guns, Guts and GLORY!

 
Posts: 6,016
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Libertydale, NC
Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 12:18 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
we know that Satan twisted scripture to tempt Jesus in much the same way that many well meaning but deceived Protestants do to justify their many false doctrines that were never before actually taught by an apostle but appear plausible since some out of context references can be found in the bible.
Deceived Catholics do the same thing as deceived Protestants. Praise God I'm neither!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
This is EXACTLY why a true believer must have been TAUGHT by an apostolic teaching authority to know what a real apostle actually taught.
We KNOW what the real apostles actually taught because they wrote it down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Too many Protestants are cherry picking their owe favorite verses out of scripture to fabricate a pretty bead of pearls
That's exactly what you have been doing. Are you being intentionally deceitful, or are you really unaware of it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
I know you do not believe that one is free to sin like some of these other denominations do - so that is good and we are in agreement here at least.
We are almost in agreement. I believe that one is not free to sin. You believe that one is free to sin if he sits in a dark room and receives absolution from a man in a dress.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
The Catholic Church is a royal priesthood a people set apart as God's very own nation. What other religion on the planet has its own world recognized nation except for the Catholic Church?
Looks like you are back to fabricating your pretty bead of pearls from out of context verses. Those verses were talking about Israel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
But there are no guarantees in life
Oh ye of little faith. God will keep all of His promises -- that's a guarantee.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Catholics believe that God gives us "signal graces" over our lives that give us greater and greater confidence in our own salvation.
Catholics believe a lot of wacky things that aren't in the Bible.

Salvation is not a slow, piecemeal process. Salvation is instant (Acts 9:18). We are born again (John 3:3) and made into a new creature (2 Cor 5:17, Gal 6:15)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
We do not believe in works salvation but can see by our own actions that we are serving God when we see the changes in our lives - loving more, being more charitable, taking insults from our enemies without hating them etc.
I'm glad to see that you have changed your tune on this. We are getting somewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
So Luther invented an "easy believism" where men are free to 'sin and sin boldly since God's grace is so great' that he seemed to suggest we should put our faith to the test by sinning!!! Absurd of course and evil.
Absolutely. Lutherans are as lost as Catholics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
This is why Jesus gave the apostles the authority to forgive sins in two ways: one through baptism for initial believers (that wipes out every personal sin and what we call Original sin inherited from Adam).

That's not Biblical. Baptism does not wipe out sin. God's grace wipes out sin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
The other way is through sacramental confession for very grave sins.

"Sacramental confession" is not Biblical.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Brother Billy if you believe that a person who dedicates himself to Jesus, believes in Jesus and is baptized but later commits a sin is not saved you are simply wrong. It’s not that cut and dry.

It IS that cut and dry, but I know how you Catholics love to use legalisms to try to find wiggle room. The passage I quoted says that saved Christians DO NOT and CANNOT sin. The passage I quoted also says that anyone who sins is of the Devil and doesn't know Jesus. There is no wiggle room there, and no loophole.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
*Unbiblical Catholic Dogma snipped to save space*

I can give you dozens of scripture verses to back all this up if you like.

Sure, why don't you paste your list of out of context verses?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
you were the one who wanted guarantees of salvation just a little bit earlier.

I didn't ask for the guarantee, but God gave it to me anyway. The LORD is so good to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
God may elect to forgive a person that He judges is sincere in their repentance but this is not the normal way that Jesus wanted it for the very reason that no one knows if God accepted those prayers.

It is easy to know if God accepted your prayer for salvation. When the sins that you used to be enslaved to are no longer appealing, when the very idea of committing a sin makes you sick to the pit of your stomach, when all you want to do is serve the Lord, when the Holy Spirit is living inside of you, then you are saved.

The Bible tells us how to know if we are saved:
2Cor 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?

1John 2:3
And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
1John 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
1John 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Jesus gave the apostles the authority to forgive sins

No, He didn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
You just don’t want to accept the truth as it was actually taught by the apostles.

I accept the truth as it was actually taught by the apostles. What I don't accept is your twisting their teachings to make it fit your extra-Biblical dogma.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
And so I have rightly divided the Word.

No, you haven't. You even admitted that you could care less about rightly dividing the word here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
This is why Catholics do not need to even worry about “dividing the word”
2Tim 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

You especially need to pay attention to the following verse:
2Tim 2:16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
And your acid test of apostolic authority is just silly and not biblical Brother Billy.

Not Biblical??? It came from the Bible. Are you saying "not Biblical" just because I named a specific deadly thing (bleach) instead of letting your priest pick his own deadly thing to drink?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Would you be willing to take your own test?

Of course not, but I'm not the one claiming to have "apostolic authority".

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Catholics have been in existence from the very beginning – 2000 years.

No, you haven't. All you do is assert.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Honestly, I did not know your true belief in the area of baptism and had to make some assumptions since so many non-Catholics think that Baptism is a mere symbol. I am actually quite relieved to discover that you do not believe this since Baptism is profoundly powerful.

You didn't know that BAPTISTS think BAPTISM is important?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
When Jesus entered the waters for His own baptism His divinity forever all sanctified water with the divine power to forgive sins and to make it possible for a baptized Christian to immediately receive the Holy Spirit when the customary rite is performed with the proper intention and Trinitarian formula (In the name of God, Son and Holy Spirit).
Where does it say THAT in the Bible?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Let me clarify that Baptism is how we formally get our initial seed of Faith (The Living Word) through The Church implanted into our heart. It matters not if we walk to the waters on our own or someone carries us there as a child. Baptism is what makes it normatively possible for any of us to be saved since in that moment we are born into a new humanity that is formed of new parents.

Where does it say THAT in the Bible?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
We literally get a new humanity formed on the prototype of Jesus as the new Adam (and Mary as the new Eve).

WHAT? I knew Catholics had some wacky beliefs, but this is a new one for me. Jesus was Mary's son, not her husband. You aren't one of those Gnostic kooks, so I assume that's which Mary you are talking about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
That's pretty exciting since through Jesus we have the spiritual DNA if you will to share in a divine-human nature and are elevated above our original humanity. This is pretty exciting since God wants us to love Him at a higher level than a human normally can. We literally step out of the fallen and limited nature of Adam and Eve to open ourselves to a new life where God can grow us into new beings that have a superior divine-human nature (always subordinate to Jesus) rather than a fallen human nature subordinate to Satan (subject to death).

Well, that's all true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
For God so loves us that to save us He will not only restore us to our pre-fallen nature which was originally perfect in Adam but will ELEVATE us to a higher nature than even Adam to make it possible for us to Love God as only Christ can. This is the powerful message that most non-Catholics never hear - we are to become literal children of God through Christ and have a share in a divine nature!! OMG - people just have no idea what God has in store for us:

1 Cor 2:9 (KJV) But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
That's all true too, except for the part about non-Catholics never hear it. Anyone who has read the Bible knows all of this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
So after baptism grace immediately starts to take root

It looks like our major disagreement about baptism and salvation is the order in which they occur. I have already shown you that belief and repentance are required before a meaningful baptism can be had.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
So to answer your question – yes baptism is a normal pre-requisite that leads to salvation. ... "baptism by desire"... "baptism by blood" ... God is free to save who He will independent of the sacraments since He is sovereign. But the normative way that gives us certain knowledge that we are on the right path to salvation is through water baptism.

I can always count on you Catholics to come up with ad-hoc loopholes when scripture doesn't back up your dogma. Is it that hard to admit that you are wrong about baptism being a necessary condition for salvation?

Please cite scripture that says that the thief on the cross was baptized in any way, shape, or form.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Brother Billy, if you scan the entire bible looking for the word saved or its close synonyms one can put together a huge spread sheet of lots of different things that one MUST do (or NOT do) in order to be “saved”.
There's only two things you must do to be saved, and that is to repent and believe. Everything else you find is telling you how to know if you or someone else is saved by listing things that a saved person will or won't do. Of course, if you pull those verses out of context and list them all side-by-side, you will just have a confusing mess on your hands.

When you leave those verses in context, the meaning is clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
This is the problem with over-reading scripture and trying to reduce it down to a few “salvation slogans” or distill down it al down to the five self-contradicting Protestant solas (that sound more like the 5 points of a secular-pentagram than they do apostolic teaching) that the Reformers came up with.

Which five points would that be, the five Calvinist points or the five Arminian points?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
This is exactly why Catholics are Christo-centric rather than purely bible-centric since we have to look at the “man” Jesus as the example of the Living Word of God to resolve some of the apparent contradictions that came out of Bible written by a multitude of inspired human writers.

There are no contradictions in the Bible. God's Word is pure and consistent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
The key concept Catholics use to discern true apostolic teaching is to apply the simple truth that God’s word can never be divided against itself anymore so than the separate persons of the Trinity can be divided against The Godhead. God is harmony – apparent contradictions always mean someone is making improper assumptions.

That's the key concept that ALL Bible believing Christians use. Catholics don't own it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
In other words we must take all of the Bible not just the parts that seem to work for the doctrinal beliefs one may want to hold to.

That is extremely rich, coming from you!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Frankly we are told to do so many things that its pretty hard to be a perfect Christian isn’t brother? Do you imagine Jesus might me trying to tell us that none of can do it without His help?

It's impossible to do it without His help.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Also note, that if we are to obey Christ we must also obey those who He told us to follow – the apostles and their successors (The Catholic Bishops).

Which part of the Bible was it when Jesus told us to obey the apostles and their "successors"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
We must also obey Him and trust Him when He says He wants us to be baptized. Will He make exceptions? Perhaps – Christ “the man” was a forgiving man and full of compassion. But Christ never told us anything that was trivial or not to our advantage. So why go against the clear indications that He wanted us to be baptized? Why put The Lord Your God to the test when its very easy to just obey Him here?
I agree with all of that. My issue was with your unbiblical statement that baptism in and of itself effects salvation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
It is simple exegesis to see that Baptism is intended to remove it.

I'm afraid you are going to have to show your work if you claim that Baptism in and of itself is intended to remove original sin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
But before I go there why do we need “saving” if we are not suffering from a fallen nature and sin in the first place?

Sin is not inherited (Ezek 18:20), but we do have a fallen nature and are prone to sin. We all have our their own sins that we need saving from --we don't need anyone else's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
These are all talking about justification. What you are not considering is that justification and sanctification are paired concepts and baptism is a part of it but is not all of it.

Yes, all of the ones you left in were talking about justification, but you cavalierly replaced with all the ones that were talking about condemnation and salvation with
"... etc.".

So, your attempt to misdirect with handwaving to avoid the parts of the Bible you don't like aren't going to work. I'm on to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Acts 9:18; 22:16 - Why does Ananias command Saint Paul (who was directly chosen by Christ) to stand up and be baptized and "wash away" his sins?
We've already answered that question.

Pastor Billy-Reuben


Upon request I will cite scripture for all these facts in God's Holy Word.

✝ This is a Christian community and we worship GOD of the Holy bible, the only Living GOD. We worship Jesus Christ, Son of GOD and Savior. Anything else is absurd. ✝
Trump / Arpaio 2016 -- The Government We Deserve
#ChristianLivesMatter

Reply With Quote
(#104)
Old
ApoplecticFalseChristian's Avatar
ApoplecticFalseChristian ApoplecticFalseChristian is offline
Unrepentant Papist Dog
Forum Member
 
Posts: 40
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Place of Legends
ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 03:18 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
I'm afraid it does.

The first thing I wanted to do once I got saved was to get baptized (for real this time). Baptism is not a necessary condition for salvation -- salvation is a necessary condition for a meaningful baptism.


The same reason I quit sinning after I got saved. It is just something saved people do.
Sorry – you are projecting your own doctrinal bias into scripture Brother Billy and missing some subtle points I am making. You are only accounting for part of the application of baptism. It is true that an ADULT or child of age of reason must come to The Church and express a desire to receive instruction then later profess their belief in Jesus before they are baptized. But it is not true in the general case that all people must first profess their faith and be baptized. You keep forgetting the part of scripture about “bring the children to me” and “Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.: In other words you just made it impossible for infants and the mentally impaired to profess their belief, be baptized and be saved. This is exactly the kinds of lies and false teachings that Satan wants everyone to believe.

And if you state that you no longer sin, especially as a matter of “definition” of your presumption that you are saved before God judges you saved then you make yourself a liar and God’s word condemns you.

1 John 1:8-10 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

The above is just another example of why you must confess your grave sins committed after baptism to an apostolic priest. Fortunately, many Christians are through prayer and discipline and grace able to keep themselves away from serious sin – but they still will often commit small venial sins (per 1 John 8:-10). Small things like being occasionally uncharitable to one’s enemies and neighbors (e.g. childish mocking or taunting etc.) can be forgiven through daily prayer. But anyone who goes to bed at night thinking they are free of all sin is seriously in error. Every Christian should pray for forgiveness for all sins consciously known or unknown before retiring each day least they be subject to judgment if they die that night.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
The text does NOT say that he had to be baptized before his sins were forgiven. His sins were forgiven first, the scales fell from his eyes, and THEN he got baptized.

…It's only meaningless if you aren't saved. Repent and be baptized, believe and be baptized.
You should not over-read scripture here. The text does not literally say that Paul’s sins were forgiven when his eyes were open. Jesus made Paul subordinate himself to apostolic authority my coming to Ananias. There Paul became intimately aware of the apostolic authority and power to heal and forgive. Paul became a believer because he had a profound personal experience but Paul’s initiation into The Church was not formally consummated until he was baptized into the New Covenant. Thus Jesus teaches us two principals here – the absolute apostolic authority and the need to be submissive to it. This is the part that will get non-Catholics into serious and grace trouble if they do not submit to that same authority before they die and knowingly reject it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Before we do that, how about you explain to me how an infant is capable of repenting and believing.
How is that the centurion’s slave can be healed from afar on the faith of another believer? Read your bible and you will see there are MANY cases of a person being healed through the faith of their friends. This is why our Church community is so vital and beneficial to our salvation us since each of us can help others in our communities get through lapses and trials of faith through the collective faith of others.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
You are making an unwarranted leap.
Nonsense. Read your bible literally:
Col 2:11-13
In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Job 14 says nothing about baptism. We need God's grace.
Psalm 51:5 says nothing about baptism. We need God's grace.

The verse does not support your conclusion….
I have successfully made the case that we have original sin and hence the need for baptism. I am honestly sorry if this breaks your milk-and-cookies view of theology and all those divinity school diplomas on your wall at home but its time to step up to the solid foods brother Billy and learn what the apostles taught us.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Anyone can get baptized, but it only means something if you are a believer. That's why people who don't believe are condemned whether or not they are baptized.

Believer's baptism is not a Protestant belief, it is a Baptist belief that comes straight from the Bible. Protestants like Lutherans, Presbyterians, etc all baptize infants who are too young to possibly be able to repent and believe.

Except for all the calls to believe and be baptized.
Yes anyone can be baptized – including those who are infants (if presented on the testimony of their parents to raise them Christian). Baptism imparts a spiritual mark on a person’s soul which reconfigures the person’s soul toward Christ. In fact a baptized person becomes a target of Satan since he sees such a person as a graven enemy who through Christ can inflict serious harm to his desire to spoil more souls. But that is OK since God will test His children and permits it and will give sufficient grace to His own to progress them in their faith. You are partially correct that it only benefits us if one responds to the grace through belief – some people, perhaps many, relapse into sin and forget who they are.

We Catholics call all those Churches that came out of the Catholic Church generically Protestants since the core theme of them all is the illicit doctrine of sola Scripture that is not apostolic and was never taught by the early Church. It is a new tradition of man created in the late 1400’s and made popular with the advent of the printing press in the mid 1500’s (and funded by the Kings to usurp power from The Church to get more drones paying them taxes – that rouse worked but its falling apart now).

No one said it was.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post

No, it doesn't.

Acts 2:38πετρος δε εφη προς αυτους μετανοησατε και βαπτισθητω εκαστος υμων επι τω ονοματι ιησου χριστου εις αφεσιν αμαρτιων και ληψεσθε την δωρεαν του αγιου πνευματος

Literally, and Peter said unto them reform, and be baptized each of you on the name of Jesus Christ, to remission of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit

Looks like I have caught you in another lie.
Read it all and also consider that there are better translations that the old KJV that have scholars have proven have deficient manuscripts and texts. But let’s not get into a version dispute – simply read the next verse and see that its clear that children of the believer’s household are stated or implied,

BTW, I thought you told me you did not sin. Is it a new tradition in the Baptist church to bear false witness or immediately jump to uncharitable accusations that there was an attempt at deception and not call that a sin? Moral relativism seems to have found a new home.

Acts 2: 38-39
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the LORD our God shall call…
Acts 2:39 says no such thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
This is starting to get really tiresome.

And neither verse has anything whatsoever to do with baptism.
Don’t despair. Paul tells us we must run the good race all the way to the finish line brother and you have a long way yet to go. This should be good exercise and get you running in the right lane and in the right direction…

The verses were not intended to talk about baptism but to calibrate the conventional meaning of the Greek word Teknon as it applies to infants to prove to you that the Greek proves that Acts 2:39 explicitly means baptism also applies to infants. I apologize if this is too technical for your Brother Billy but I wanted to extend you every bit of opportunity to know the truth since you don’t have it all.

Perhaps you are too tired to see clearly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
I already knew what Catholics teach about Baptism. This isn't the first time I've had this very same debate.


This was a long post. Here is the gist.
  • The so-called unbroken line of succession from Peter to Benedict is a myth.
  • Baptism is important, but it doesn't mean anything if you aren't saved. That's why calls to be baptized are accompanied by calls to repent and believe. It's also why there is no place in the Bible that states that people who repent and believe but are not baptized are condemned.
  • There is no intermediary between man and God (John 16:13, Gal 3:20). We don't need to go sit in a dark room and have a man in a dress tell us to chant a few spells to receive absolution for sins committed since we got saved, because saved Christians do not sin (1John 3:6-9). If you are continuing to sin after your baptism, then you have concrete proof that you are not saved.
I spent three hours responding to something that you copied and pasted from a Catholic propaganda website. I won't do it again. Next time you post a huge wall of text instead of just getting to the point, don't be surprised to find your post removed.

Pastor Billy-Reuben
Your assertions are without substance and the burden is on you to disprove that The Catholic Church does not have a valid apostolic succession. History is on our side. Baptists do not even exist in history till less than 500 years ago. How is that such a fledgling Johnny Come Lately ecclesial community can make any credibly claim to any knowledge of apostolic succession?

BTW – there are so many different Baptist denominations I apologize if you believe in real water baptisms since some of your other sects do not and I had no idea what your particular sect believed in coming in here.

I like your admission that a baptized person must first believe. Catholics hold to this same belief except for the case of infant baptisms who may be baptized on the faith of their parents and their pledge to raise them in the faith as believers. If a baptized person does not hold to their original profession of faith (or make good on their parents pledge later in life) then yes I agree baptism does them no good; in fact it may be worse since such a person no longer has turned their back on the truth and will have no excuse (‘to those that much have been given much is expected’).

On your final point the bible and apostolic tradition completely prove that you are preaching a new gospel that no apostle ever taught. Sins committed after baptism must normally be confessed to an apostolic priest. Here I am compelled to get you to do your homework and to make you see that Satan is causing you to err by appealing to the natural human demagoguery of contempt for authority (in this case ecclesial). Recollect Paul having to submit to the Authority of The Church before He was fully accepted. Apostolic authority is very legitimate and very real:

Luke 10:16He that heareth you [ed: apostolic authority] heareth Me; and he that despiseth you despiseth Me; and he that despiseth Me despiseth Him that sent Me.

God has directed me to give you some homework Brother Billy. Please read and mediate on the following scripture verses that prove that Jesus wants us to come and submit to the apostolic authority of the priests of The Church to get forgiveness of sins:

John 20:21-23 , Matt. 9:8 Matt. 9:6, Mark 2:10, Luke 5:24 , Matt. 18:18 , John 20:22-23, Matt. 18:18, 2 Cor. 2:10, 2 Cor. 5:18, James 5:15-16, 1 Tim. 2:5, Lev. 5:4-6; 19:21-22, James 5:16, Acts 19:18 Matt. 3:6; Mark 1:5 1 Tim. 6:12, 1 John 1:9, Num. 5:7, 2 Sam.12:14, Neh. 9:2-3, Sir. 4:26, Baruch 1:14, 1 John 5:16-17; Luke 12:47-48, Matt.5:19

You are not too far from the truth but you have a way to go yet.

God Bless,
ApostolicChristian


Matthew 16:18: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
2 Thess 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Reply With Quote
(#105)
Old
Ahimaaz Smith's Avatar
Ahimaaz Smith Ahimaaz Smith is offline
True Christian™
True Christian™

True Republican

 
Posts: 2,546
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pastor Deacon Fred Hall, Landover Christian University School of Law, Freehold, Iowa, God's Country
Ahimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious Rapture
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 04:17 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
We have 2,000 years of continuous presence of popes and all the archaeological artifacts of the early church in our museums
You've got us there. For example, at least three Catholic churches have the skull of St. Bonaventure in their vaults. Truly, that is a miracle.

Quote:
we do not not deify the bible
Deify the Bible? Hell, you obviously don't even read the Bible. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1

Quote:
Baptists do not even exist in history till less than 500 years ago. How is that such a fledgling Johnny Come Lately ecclesial community can make any credibly claim to any knowledge of apostolic succession?
You must have missed the Sunday school class in which they discussed John the Baptist. He was born before Christ, my friend. And you are just showing your anti-Christian religious bigotry by calling us a "Johnny Come Lately ecclesial community." That sort of ugliness has no place here at Landover. We dont feel that we need to make up some apostilic succession idiocy to keep our art collection fully funded the way you Catholics do. If God had intended there to be an apostilic succession conveying magical powers like you claim for your "priesthood," he would have spelled that out clearly in the Bible. God was never shy about giving us rules.



Pour out thy fury upon the heathen that know thee not, and upon the families that call not on thy name.... Jeremiah 10:25
Reply With Quote
(#106)
Old
Wide-Open's Avatar
Wide-Open Wide-Open is offline
Director of European Evangelical Outreach
A Shining Example of Christ's Love
Quite possibly the only decent, heterosexual human being in the whole of Europe
True Christian™

One Year/1000 posts Saved 1 Year 1st Year Bible College 2nd Year Bible College 3rd Year Bible College 4th Year Bible College True Christian™ Real American™ Christian Love Tithing Manager Heaven Bound Tagging for Jesus TC Bravery Mission to Australia Protected by JESUS Pastor of GOD Ex-Masturbator Super Soaker Baptism Award True Christian Nerd True Christian Hotrodder Ready for the Rapture True Christian Caucasian Senior Pastor Teabag Patriot Friend of Jesus Flat Earth Tell her once Persecuted Porn Resistant Pro-Life Mission to Las Vegas True Republican Ex-eurotrash Touched by Jesus Saved 10 Years

 
Posts: 18,677
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: A frictional country
Wide-Open will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Wide-Open will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Wide-Open will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Wide-Open will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Wide-Open will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Wide-Open will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Wide-Open will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Wide-Open will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Wide-Open will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Wide-Open will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Wide-Open will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 04:50 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
You should not over-read scripture here.
Indeed. You've said that a few times now.

Let us just skim over Scripture. I mean, it's only God talking, right? So let's not seek to much into it.


Psalm 81:10:
I am the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt:
open thy mouth wide, and I will fill it.
Reply With Quote
(#107)
Old
ApoplecticFalseChristian's Avatar
ApoplecticFalseChristian ApoplecticFalseChristian is offline
Unrepentant Papist Dog
Forum Member
 
Posts: 40
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Place of Legends
ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 07:22 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Deceived Catholics do the same thing as deceived Protestants. Praise God I'm neither!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Deception is not binding on those who are not of mind to know better. Are you going to appeal to the Catholic doctrine of "invincible ignorance" for your non-apostolic use of scripture on your day of judgment?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
We KNOW what the real apostles actually taught because they wrote it down.
Scripture does not work that way. Scripture is not self teaching as the 33,000 different Protestant sects who all teach something different demonstrate. You have only a non-contextual and non-period superficial understanding of scripture. I bet you did not know that scripture has 4 senses to prevent unauthorized people from high jacking it and teaching it in inappropriate ways so that they “may have eyes but not see etc.”.

Catholics are the single authority on scripture since Catholics are the one's who actually wrote all the NT scripture and know what it actually means from the handed down teaching and traditions received from the apostles and successors.

Jesus only wrote two things in His life and that was in the sand. There is a reason for that – He wants no one to think he can roll his own salvation by simply finding a magic book and start making wishes like Simon the Magician tried to do. You should know better Brother Billy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
That's exactly what you have been doing. Are you being intentionally deceitful, or are you really unaware of it?
Sorry, I was quicker on the draw Brother Billy – you are the one who calls scripture irrelevant when it does not support your case. Are we going to play the “I shot you first – no I did" game here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
We are almost in agreement. I believe that one is not free to sin. You believe that one is free to sin if he sits in a dark room and receives absolution from a man in a dress.
No I do not believe one is free to sin. Sin is to be avoided as much as we can. Some sin in deliberate (and that is usually grave) and other sin is unintentional but we may have some culpability if we used poor judgment. All of us have better days than other and sometimes we can cave into new temptations that the enemy lays in wait to use to trip us. Christians are not perfect – just forgiven. We should never ever go out with an intention to sin and then confess it. That is mocking God and woe to that person if he tries to presume God’s mercy and sin thinking he will be forgiven. But there are times when the human will may be weak due to an extraordinary amount of stress or pressure where a “good Christian person” may cave into sin where he ordinarily might not (that young beautiful woman threw herself at you at that Baptist convention since she was so moved by your sermon eh?). This is what confession is for – when we are overwhelmed by temptation or exercise poor judgment and find our selves in over our heads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Looks like you are back to fabricating your pretty bead of pearls from out of context verses. Those verses were talking about Israel.
It only appears that way since you have a very one dimensional view of scripture and fail to see the many OT prefiguring events in the bible. The trinity is not a word you will find in the bible – yet the concept is clearly present and you accept it. There are many such things like this in the bible and this is why Baptist theology is found thin and lacking and too often misses so much rich depth of spiritual truth. Here is where I am forced against my normal inclination to prove to you how fatal literalistic reading of scripture can be when scripture begs the reader to go deeper and get to the solid food. If we take Romans 3:10-18 literally as an example then we are forced by the Apostle paul to not believe one single word of scripture since Paul tells us ALL men, including the prophets and apostles and himself are liars and does not exclude himself. Was Paul lying or making an brief exception to tell us the truth?

Romans 3:10-18
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: 11There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. 12They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. 13Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: 14Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: 15Their feet are swift to shed blood: 16Destruction and misery are in their ways: 17And the way of peace have they not known: 18There is no fear of God before their eyes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Catholics believe a lot of wacky things that aren't in the Bible.
But you know what – Protestants and non-Catholics like to follow our lead and do such blatantly non-biblical things like going to church on Sunday instead of on the Sabbath (Saturday) like the bible commands you to. Why is that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Salvation is not a slow, piecemeal process. Salvation is instant (Acts 9:18). We are born again (John 3:3) and made into a new creature (2 Cor 5:17, Gal 6:15)
Oh really? Since when is scale falling out of one’s eyes mean one is saved. Paul and the other bible writers tell us many times that we could lose our salvation (Matt. 7:18 Matt. 7:21, Matt. 12:30-32, Matt. 22:14, Luke 8:13, Luke 12:42-46, Luke 15:11-32, John 6:70-71, John 15:1-10, Rom. 11:20-23, John 17:12 John 6:37, John 6:39, John 6:40, John 6:44, John 10:27-28, Rev. 2:4-5, Rev. 3:4 Rev. 3:5, Exodus 32:33, Rev. 3:11, Rev. 13:10, 14:12 Rev. 21:7, Rev. 22:19 ).

So, since when is birth an instant process – the traditional period for birth is 40 weeks? Don’t believe me ask you momma how long she had to carry you in the womb. So unless you and Nicodemus were premature wonderchildren I don’t think nature even supports this wild idea.

BTW – no one is denying that we are not a new creation after we are matured in Christ.

But Catholics utterly reject the Protestant theories of imputation of grace promoted in contest to each other by their two contradiction champions - Calvin & Luther. This whole imputation theory is silly and leads to the problems of unauthentic justification where God must accept Luther’s repulsive idea of a saved sinner as a ‘snow covered dunghill’. God could never accept that sort of thin veneer and wants the genuine thing. Catholic however believe that a real interior change happens with a real authentic change of nature that is first begun in baptism but grown to perfection over one’s life in much the same way that a seed sprouts (within the heart). That is, under God’s nourishing grace (use the metaphor of rain and seasons [trials] etc.) that seed grows into a mature tree and eventually bears a fruitful vine that can produce good works suitable to God’s purpose for us. In other words Catholics hold to the belief that one must cooperate with God’s grace over one’s entire life to reach a level of spiritual maturity that God wants us to attain. Ultimately the goal is theosis – the spiritual equivalent of “being all we can be” which approaches Christ like perfection in the fullness of divine-human achievement.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
That's not Biblical. Baptism does not wipe out sin. God's grace wipes out sin.
God’s grace is invoked through baptism. Let’s not get bogged down in semantics please just as acceptable prayer invokes God’s favor for things we need. Baptism is so compelling to God that He will always honor it – unless someone has already been baptized – in which case that person commits a blasphemy for not trusting in the one time need for baptism. Didn’t you say you were baptized 2 times and also mention you do not sin?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
"Sacramental confession" is not Biblical.
I can cite you at least 3 dozen scripture verses that prove you wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
It IS that cut and dry, but I know how you Catholics love to use legalisms to try to find wiggle room. The passage I quoted says that saved Christians DO NOT and CANNOT sin. The passage I quoted also says that anyone who sins is of the Devil and doesn't know Jesus. There is no wiggle room there, and no loophole.
That is not a fair characterization Brother Billy. Catholics like to point out that God is merciful and does not condemn us for being imperfect humans and gives us the sacramental means to remain in His favor. Your interpretation can not be reconciled with 1 John 1:8 – “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” This is because your theology is too thin and lacks the depth to realize that there are two severities of sin – moral and venial. Both are forgivable but the kind of sin spoken to in 1 John 3 is of the mortal variety – not the small stuff. Fortunately, Jesus is so awesome that even a baptized Christian who falls off the wagon so to speak can be forgiven through sacramental confession and penance – thank God since in this age of moral decline almost no one could make it to heaven without the sacrament of reconciliation (confession). I urge you Baptists to come to understand this truth and convert while you still have time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Sure, why don't you paste your list of out of context verses?
Here ya go – all the authorities and necessity for oral confession:
John 20:21, John 20:22, John 20:23, Matt. 9:8, Matt. 9:6; Mark 2:10, Luke 5:24
Matt. 18:18, John 20:22-23; Matt. 18:18, 2 Cor. 2:10, 2 Cor. 5:18, James 5:15-16, 1 Tim 2:5 . Lev. 5:4-6; 19:21-22 James 5:16, James 5:14-15, Acts 19:18
Matt. 3:6; Mark 1:5 - 1 Tim. 6:12 ,1 John 1:9 ,Num. 5:7, 2 Sam. 12:14
Neh. 9:2-3, Sir. 4:26, Baruch 1:14 ,1 John 5:16-17; Luke 12:47-48 ,Matt. 5:19


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
It is easy to know if God accepted your prayer for salvation. When the sins that you used to be enslaved to are no longer appealing, when the very idea of committing a sin makes you sick to the pit of your stomach, when all you want to do is serve the Lord, when the Holy Spirit is living inside of you, then you are saved.

The Bible tells us how to know if we are saved:
2Cor 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?

1John 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
1John 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
1John 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
That is all very good and well – no Christian likes to offend God or Jesus but I see Christians of all faiths (including Baptists often committing sins. The truth is that while true Christians abhor sin in our modern culture there are so many temptations and traps that one is bombarded daily with opportunities to sin and eventually even the most saintly and pious Christian will slip up and fall into sin from time to time. Fortunately they can get right back up again, tearfully confess those sins under a spirit of repentance and get right back again in God’s favor. Even a habitual sinner may have a personal addiction or proclivity (e.g. swearing at and mocking Catholics ) that is more a sign of mental or emotional disorder that mitigates the sin to less than a full consent to sin. God will not hold a person of such mind to as severe a sin as a person who deliberately plans to sin – but even this latter can be forgiven. The important thing is to be ever watchful and to go to confession routinely until one over comes the sins that hold our advancement back. Prayer is also extremely effecious of purging us of the smaller sins that can accumulate in frequency and harm our spiritual health.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
No, He didn't.
Yes he most certainly did give the authority to forgive sins – see the many scriptures I referenced above.

I am skipping a few non value added comments you added here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
You didn't know that BAPTISTS think BAPTISM is important?
There are so many Baptists flavors I had no idea if your sects actually believed in water baptism – some ironically don’t and call themselves “Baptists”.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
WHAT? I knew Catholics had some wacky beliefs, but this is a new one for me. Jesus was Mary's son, not her husband. You aren't one of those Gnostic kooks, so I assume that's which Mary you are talking about.
Nope – most definitely not a Gnostic. But you must not read the apostle Paul too much. I am giving you some very good spiritual insights that you should discover on your own since they are profound. If you can’t find the new Adam and the new Eve in the Bible then you really need to question if you are truly saved since you do not know who your new spiritual parents are. Check into 1 Corinthians 15:45-49, Lk .1 :26-38 and some of the early church fathers (Saint Justin the Martyr 155 AD, Saint Irenaeus wrote this between 180-199 A.D, Tertullian wrote this between 208 and 212 A.D) and also look at the OT topology of scripture and do a little simple exegesis – its all there and its profound and you won’t learn this in Sunday school. It’s of the variety of mature solid food that Paul speaks of that is too difficult for those still simple in the faith.

Quote:
Originally Posted by an exegesis of scripture of OT and NT marian types
Eve, the O.T."Type".........................Mary, the N.T. "Antitype"
Created without original sin, Gen 2:22-25.........Created without original sin, Luke 1:28,42 *1
There was a virgin, Gen 2:22-25.......................There is a virgin, Luke 1:27-34
There was a tree, Gen 2:16-17..........................There was a cross made from a tree, Matt 27:31-35
There was a fallen angel, Gen 3:1-13................There was a loyal angel, Luke 1:26-38
A satanic serpent tempted her, Gen 3:4-6...........A satanic dragon threatened her, Rev 12:4-6,13-17
There was pride, Gen 3:4-7...............................There was humility, Luke 1:38
There was disobedience, Gen 3:4-7....................There was obedience, Luke 1:38
There was a fall, Gen 3:16-20...........................There was redemption, John 19:34
Death came through Eve, Gen 3:17-19..............Life Himself came through Mary, John 10:28
She was mentioned in Genesis 3:2-22................She was mentioned in Genesis 3:15
Could not approach the tree of life Gen 3:24......Approached the "Tree of Life", John 19:25
An angel kept her out of Eden, Gen 3:24............An angel protected her, Rev 12:7-9
Prophecy of the coming of Christ, Gen 3:15.......The Incarnation of Christ, Luke 2:7
Firstborn was a man child, Gen 4:1...................Firstborn was a man child, Luke 2:7, Rev 12:5
Firstborn became a sinner, Gen 4:1-8................Firstborn was the Savior, Luke 2:34
The mother of all the living, Gen 3:20................The spiritual mother of all the living, John 19:27
Returned to dust, Gen 3:19................................Taken to Heaven, Rev 11:19,12:1
.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
I can always count on you Catholics to come up with ad-hoc loopholes when scripture doesn't back up your dogma. Is it that hard to admit that you are wrong about baptism being a necessary condition for salvation?

Please cite scripture that says that the thief on the cross was baptized in any way, shape, or form.
We simply can’t say things that are counter to explicit commandments from Jesus even when there are some apparent contradictions in parts of scripture. But the operative word here is “apparent”. I have explained all the apparent contradictions.

I explained that it was not a water baptism and the thief received a baptism by desire. This is determined through exegesis of all the scriptures on baptism and Rom. 2:29 that tell us about: the “circumcision is that of the heart”, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not of men but God. God is not bound to the sacraments and may intervene in special circumstances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
There's only two things you must do to be saved, and that is to repent and believe. Everything else you find is telling you how to know if you or someone else is saved by listing things that a saved person will or won't do. Of course, if you pull those verses out of context and list them all side-by-side, you will just have a confusing mess on your hands.
There is more to it I am afraid. Salvation is a living according to the New Covenant sealed by Baptism every day of one’s life and availing oneself frequently of the sacraments – especially Eucharist (Body and Blood of Christ as commanded).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Which five points would that be, the five Calvinist points or the five Arminian points?
It doesn’t matter – all the protestant solas contradict since none can stand alone with 5 of them. It’s a bogus and pure fabrication.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
That's the key concept that ALL Bible believing Christians use. Catholics don't own it.
The Bible is an integral part of the Liturgy of The Catholic Church. Only Catholics understand it since we have the proper apostolic teaching as well as the proper authority to teach others. Those that do not have this authority are sewing the seeds of weeds and reaping their own destruction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Which part of the Bible was it when Jesus told us to obey the apostles and their "successors"?
I have given you this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
I'm afraid you are going to have to show your work if you claim that Baptism in and of itself is intended to remove original sin.
Perspire to read what I have told you – the work is done but the soil is weak…

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Sin is not inherited (Ezek 18:20), but we do have a fallen nature and are prone to sin. We all have our their own sins that we need saving from --we don't need anyone else's.
And just how do you imagine you get your fallen nature through osmosis? Please don’t tell me you don’t have a belly button…

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Yes, all of the ones you left in were talking about justification, but you cavalierly replaced with all the ones that were talking about condemnation and salvation with "... etc.".

So, your attempt to misdirect with handwaving to avoid the parts of the Bible you don't like aren't going to work. I'm on to you.
Sorry – I was tired and it looked to me like your summary comments all used the words “justification” and I took you at your word without reading them all closely. If you want to redress it we can talk more.

That’s all - your comments been responded to.

You need to become Catholic since you no longer have the excuse of Invincible Ignorance. You have been given the opportunity to know too much now and if you consciously reject it may have eternal conseqences. Sorry - I will pray for you.

ApostlicChristian


Matthew 16:18: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
2 Thess 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Reply With Quote
(#108)
Old
ApoplecticFalseChristian's Avatar
ApoplecticFalseChristian ApoplecticFalseChristian is offline
Unrepentant Papist Dog
Forum Member
 
Posts: 40
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Place of Legends
ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 08:31 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ahimaaz Smith View Post
You've got us there. For example, at least three Catholic churches have the skull of St. Bonaventure in their vaults. Truly, that is a miracle.
What would be a miracle would be to produce credible evidence of this. That said it is pious practice to use relics as parts of the altar stones of such high level saints as St. Bonaventure who was extremely regarded as a seraphic doctor of the church with quite a few miracles attributed and confirmed to him. Ironic to the topic here is that he was extremely cerebral and intellectually a peer of Aquinas and Augustine but also an extremely spiritual Franciscan Minister General. This saint attained levels of spiritual perfection that most of us could only dream of. Chances are if they used the skull as a relic (which is likely) they probably just took small portions of bone material and distributed it to multiple churches. I would expect that Franciscan monasteries and chapels probably all received some small relic. But I can assure you that somone is propagating a myth here (most likely an anti-Catholic site) to generate polemics that will not stand up to scrutiny.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ahimaaz Smith View Post
Deify the Bible? Hell, you obviously don't even read the Bible. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1
I am impressed that you made the connection of St. John's usage of some of the advanced Greek concepts of "The Word" but I hope you don't extend that to The Bible - a thing John or any apostle never saw (nor imagined) since it did not exist till Catholic Pope Damasus put it together centuries later. While the Bible is a portion of revealed word Christ is ALL the Living Word of God - spoken, lived and written. Did you make the connection to Jesus as the living word of God made flesh in the incarnation accounts and the Word that comes down from heaven like manna in John's accounts of The Eucharist? Do you heed John in his insistance that Jesus' body and blood are real food that we must partake of? Or did you turn your back on Jesus and reject The Word made flesh like those false followers of Christ identified in John 6:66 (ironic chapter and verse no?) who only wanted to hear the words they wanted to hear?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ahimaaz Smith View Post
You must have missed the Sunday school class in which they discussed John the Baptist. He was born before Christ, my friend. And you are just showing your anti-Christian religious bigotry by calling us a "Johnny Come Lately ecclesial community." That sort of ugliness has no place here at Landover. We dont feel that we need to make up some apostilic succession idiocy to keep our art collection fully funded the way you Catholics do. If God had intended there to be an apostilic succession conveying magical powers like you claim for your "priesthood," he would have spelled that out clearly in the Bible. God was never shy about giving us rules.
Please don't even try to tell me your denominational sect came from John the Baptist - there is absolutely no scriptural nor historical support that link modern day baptists with any movement in Jesus' time. Absurd. Baptists histories ALL come after The Protestant Revolution in the 1500's. The Baptist perpetuity view (also known as Baptist succession) is proved to be a fabrication of wishful thinking with absolutely no credible historical basis. Nor is there any direct evidence to support "Landmarkism" or "Successionism" in Christian history. The only way a Baptist could make a claim to the early church would be to identify with one of the heretical groups such as the Gnostics and Nestorians who were all condemned. Are you claiming a familial ancestorial linkage to one of them?

In keeping with your opening remarks about skulls and relics I will accept your claim if you can show me John the Baptists skull on a silver platter as an artifact of proof? But if you do so that would make Herod's promiscuous wife's daughter a leading figure in your history since she was instrumental in severing the linkage to the Christian Church. After-all, John paved he way for Christ and while popular with the people consciously reduced himself to make Christ larger by insulting King Herod and his wife.

ApostolicChristian


Matthew 16:18: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
2 Thess 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Reply With Quote
(#109)
Old
Nobar King's Avatar
Nobar King Nobar King is offline
Municipal Code Archivist - Deuteronomy 28:58
Christ's Guardian
True Christian™

One Year/1000 posts Saved 1 Year True Christian™ True Christian Provider™ award Ribfest '07 Christian Love Tin Tither Real American™ Cleanest Kitchen Mission to Australia Heaven Bound Tagging for Jesus Protected by JESUS Ex-Masturbator Super Soaker Baptism Award True Christian Hotrodder Ready for the Rapture True Christian Caucasian True Christian Nerd TC Bravery Ex-liberal Ex-Christ-Killer Friend of Jesus Flat Earth Saved 5 Years Tell her once Persecuted Porn Resistant Pro-Life 20,000 posts Eats the Most Pork True Republican Divorcee Batman Shooting Survivor Loves a GODLY Chic-Fil-A Early riser Guns, Guts and GLORY! Proud Niglet Sponsorer Kirk Cameron Fan Club Prayer Warrior Touched by Jesus Grammar Nazi Pancake Dinner Anti-sodomy Hands Off Pastor Ezekiel Cup of Jesus Trump of GOD Donald Trump 2016! Proud Survivor of the Overwatch Wars Wall of Jesus Alternative Facts Saved 10 Years

 
Posts: 23,743
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mostly on the front porch.
Nobar King will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Nobar King will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Nobar King will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Nobar King will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Nobar King will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Nobar King will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Nobar King will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Nobar King will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Nobar King will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Nobar King will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Nobar King will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 08:46 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
I will accept your claim if you can show me John the Baptists skull on a silver platter as an artifact of proof?
What kind of church do you think this is?


May you be a blessing to every life you touch.
Reply With Quote
(#110)
Old
ApoplecticFalseChristian's Avatar
ApoplecticFalseChristian ApoplecticFalseChristian is offline
Unrepentant Papist Dog
Forum Member
 
Posts: 40
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Place of Legends
ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 04:27 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobar King View Post
What kind of church do you think this is?
Thanks for the tacit compliment of presuming I am a thinking man.

For some ineffable reason, for the time being this question somehow renders me speechless except to say:

"Men do not differ much about what things they will call evils; they differ enormously about what evils they will call excusable." (GK Chesteron)

ApostolicChristian


Matthew 16:18: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
2 Thess 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Reply With Quote
(#111)
Old
Pastor Billy-Reuben's Avatar
Pastor Billy-Reuben Pastor Billy-Reuben is offline
Senior Pastor
VP of Evangelical Outreach
On FIRE for Jesus
True Christian™

One Year/1000 posts Saved 1 Year Saved 5 Years 1st Year Bible College 2nd Year Bible College 3rd Year Bible College Saved 10 Years 4th Year Bible College 2008 Witch Hunt Award Long service medal, 1st class Christian Love True Christian™ The Al E. Pistle Award for Excellence in Rebuking Tithing Manager True Christian Provider™ award Ribfest '02 Real American™ Senior Pastor Heaven Bound TC Bravery Protected by JESUS Pastor of GOD Ex-Masturbator Super Soaker Baptism Award Ready for the Rapture True Christian Caucasian The Lord’s Witness Wound Jailed for JESUS Teabag Patriot Friend of Jesus Flat Earth Tell her once Persecuted Pro-Life Eats the Most Pork True Republican Guns, Guts and GLORY!

 
Posts: 6,016
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Libertydale, NC
Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 06:40 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Sorry – you are projecting your own doctrinal bias into scripture Brother Billy and missing some subtle points I am making.

My doctrine comes straight from a literal reading of in-context scripture. Your subtil points are loosely based on a combination of figurative interpretation, out-of-context scripture, and extra-biblical traditions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
In other words you just made it impossible for infants and the mentally impaired to profess their belief, be baptized and be saved.

Wait, how did I make it impossible for infants and mentally impaired to profess belief? When was it ever possible for an infant to profess belief?

When does the Bible say that one can profess belief on another's behalf? That sounds like a Mormon belief, where they posthumously baptize non-Mormons into the Mormon faith.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
1 John 1:8-10 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

I never said I have not sinned, but now that the Holy Spirit is inside of me, I cannot sin any more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Fortunately, many Christians are through prayer and discipline and grace able to keep themselves away from serious sin

No one can resist temptation to sin through his own efforts. If that were possible, we wouldn't need God's Grace.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
but they still will often commit small venial sins (per 1 John 8:-10).

1 John 1:8-10 is not talking about committing new sins. It is talking about the sins that we committed before we got saved. Basically, it is saying that God forgives but doesn't forget.

Before you again falsely accuse of inserting my own "bias" into this scripture, 1 John 3:9 says that born again Christians CANNOT sin. There are no contradictions in the Bible, but there are plenty of contradictions between the Bible and your doctrine.

You accuse me of inserting my own bias into scripture, but you need to consider the beam in your own eye. The passage you quoted says we need to confess our sins, but doesn't say anything about a requirement to confess them to someone with "apostolic authority". The Bible doesn't say that anywhere. I confessed my sins directly to God.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
God has directed me to give you some homework Brother Billy. Please read and mediate on the following scripture verses that prove that Jesus wants us to come and submit to the apostolic authority of the priests of The Church to get forgiveness of sins:


Lev. 5:4-6; 19:21-22, , Num. 5:7, 2 Sam.12:14, Neh. 9:2-3
These verses have nothing to do with the apostles.

Matt. 9:6, Matt. 9:8, Mark 2:10, Luke 5:24, James 5:15-16, 1 Tim. 2:5
These verses all say that Jesus has the power to forgive sins. They don't say anything about the apostles having that power.

1 Tim. 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Did you mean to include this verse? Because it proves you wrong. Jesus is the ONLY mediator between God and men. We don't need to confess my sins to someone with "apostolic authority"

1 John 5:16-17, Luke 12:47-48, Matt.5:19, 1 Tim. 6:12
These verses say nothing about confession.

Acts 19:18, Matt. 3:6; Mark 1:5, 1 John 1:9
These verses talk about confession, but say nothing about a requirement to confess to someone with "apostolic authority".

Sirach and Baruch are not scripture, and even if they were, the verses you cited say nothing about a requirement to confess to someone with "apostolic authority".

So, that leaves you with
John 20:21-23, Matt. 18:18, John 20:22-23, Matt. 18:18, 2 Cor. 2:10, and 2 Cor. 5:18, which, when taken out of context, are the easiest for you to twist into your doctrine.

I read those verses as Jesus charging the apostles with the duty to preach the doctrine of remission of sins, and to let people know that their sins are forgiven if they repent, and not forgiven if they remain unreprepentant.

You read those verses as Jesus granting the apostles the power to forgive sins directly. If you read the verses that way, then they contradict
1 Tim. 2:5, which says that there is no intermedary between man and God. You already admitted that when there is an apparent contradiction, it means that someone is making improper assumptions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
This is because your theology is too thin and lacks the depth to realize that there are two severities of sin – moral and venial.

So theoglies that lack extrabiblical nonsense are "too thin"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
1 John 3 is of the mortal variety – not the small stuff.

Is that why the Greek text uses the same word for sin (αμαρτιαν) in 1 John 1 and 1 John 3?

1 John 1 is talking about before we get saved, and 1 John 3 is talking about after we get saved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Fortunately, Jesus is so awesome that even a baptized Christian who falls off the wagon

A baptized "Chrisian" who "falls of the wagon" wasn't saved in the first place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
That is all very good and well – no Christian likes to offend God or Jesus but I see Christians of all faiths (including Baptists often committing sins.

You see Christians (and Baptists) in name only.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
On your final point the bible and apostolic tradition completely prove that you are preaching a new gospel that no apostle ever taught.

No apostle except for John, because that's the apostle I quoted.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
You should not over-read scripture here. ... Thus Jesus teaches us two principals here – the absolute apostolic authority and the need to be submissive to it. This is the part that will get non-Catholics into serious and grace trouble if they do not submit to that same authority before they die and knowingly reject it.

I shouldn't "over-read" scripture, but it's OK if you do it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
How is that the centurion’s slave can be healed from afar on the faith of another believer? Read your bible and you will see there are MANY cases of a person being healed through the faith of their friends.

That doesn't answer my question at all. Being healed of an affliction because of someone else's faith is a very different thing from being saved because of someone else's faith.

You believe that I am in error. If you believe that a person can be saved by another person's faith, then your faith should be strong enough to save me. You can pray for me to be saved, and then there will be no need to continue any debate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Nonsense. Read your bible literally:
Col 2:11-13

I read it literally, and that passage says literally nothing about baptizing infants.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
I have successfully made the case that we have original sin and hence the need for baptism.

No, because I have shown that sin is not inherited, and you haven't shown that baptism is the be all and end all of salvation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
I am honestly sorry if this breaks your milk-and-cookies view of theology and all those divinity school diplomas on your wall at home but its time to step up to the solid foods brother Billy and learn what the apostles taught us.

It might make you feel better about yourself to patronize me and belittle Baptist theology, but you aren't going to win any converts that way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
simply read the next verse and see that its clear that children of the believer’s household are stated or implied,

Sure thing...

Acts 2:39
υμιν γαρ εστιν η επαγγελια και τοις τεκνοις υμων και πασιν τοις εις μακραν οσους αν προσκαλεσηται κυριος ο θεος ημων

Literally, "For you is the pledge, and to the children, and to those that are far away, whosoever the lord our God shall call."

So, the pledge or promise of the remission of sins and the Gift of the Holy Spirit are available to anyone that God calls. I've never said anything different.

That verse doesn't say that infants should be baptized. Again, please consider the beam in your own eye before accusing me of reading my own bias into scripture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
The verses were not intended to talk about baptism but to calibrate the conventional meaning of the Greek word Teknon as it applies to infants to prove to you that the Greek proves that Acts 2:39 explicitly means baptism also applies to infants. I apologize if this is too technical for your Brother Billy

It's not "too technical". It's just that Acts 2:39 ALSO doesn't say anything about baptizing infants.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Perhaps you are too tired to see clearly?

I don't see it at all because it is not there. One can only see it when filtered through the lens of Catholic dogma.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
BTW, I thought you told me you did not sin. Is it a new tradition in the Baptist church to bear false witness or immediately jump to uncharitable accusations that there was an attempt at deception and not call that a sin?

No, but it is not a sin to call a spade a spade.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Don’t despair. Paul tells us we must run the good race all the way to the finish line brother and you have a long way yet to go.

Tell me about it. I have a feeling it's going to take a long time to unravel the Gordian knot of your false doctrines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Your assertions are without substance and the burden is on you to disprove that The Catholic Church does not have a valid apostolic succession.

You made the claim, so it is up to you to prove it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
History is on our side.

Earlier, you said that Emperor Constantine's religious title was "Pontifex Maximus", meaning he was the head of the pagan priesthood in Rome.

I want you to look at this picture:



That is a piece of art commissend by Pope Benedict XVI. It says "
Benedictus XVI Pont(ifex) Max(imus) Anno Domini MMV Pont(ificatus) I"

It looks like the current Pope calls himself Pontifex Maximus, just like Emperor Constantine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
I like your admission that a baptized person must first believe.

It's not an "admission" so much as a plain statement of what's in the Bible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Catholics hold to this same belief except for the case of infant baptisms who may be baptized on the faith of their parents and their pledge to raise them in the faith as believers.

There you go again looking for your wiggle room


Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Apostolic authority is very legitimate and very real:

Luke 10:16He that heareth you [ed: apostolic authority] heareth Me; and he that despiseth you despiseth Me; and he that despiseth Me despiseth Him that sent Me.



Up until now, you were only implicitly inserting your own bias into the scripture. Now you are doing it blatantly and obviously!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Catholics are the single authority on scripture since Catholics are the one's who actually wrote all the NT scripture

If Catholics had really written all of the NT scripture, then you'd think that it would plainly state all of the Catholic doctrines. Instead, you have to rely on
lots of creative exegesis and handwaving to wring your doctrine out of it. Catholics are no better than Protestants in this regard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Jesus only wrote two things in His life and that was in the sand. There is a reason for that – He wants no one to think he can roll his own salvation by simply finding a magic book and start making wishes like Simon the Magician tried to do. You should know better Brother Billy.

No one ever claimed that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Sorry, I was quicker on the draw Brother Billy – you are the one who calls scripture irrelevant when it does not support your case.

All scripture is relevant.

When I said "irrelevant" earlier, it meant that the scripture you cited had no relevance to the point you were trying to make.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Sin is to be avoided as much as we can. Some sin in deliberate (and that is usually grave) and other sin is unintentional but we may have some culpability if we used poor judgment.

That sounds like a person who was never saved to begin with. I already cited scripture, written by an apostle, that says if someone sins it is proof that they don't know Jesus.

Sin is sin. Please cite scripture that makes a distinction between "grave" and "venial" sins.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Here is where I am forced against my normal inclination to prove to you how fatal literalistic reading of scripture can be when scripture begs the reader to go deeper and get to the solid food. If we take Romans 3:10-18 literally as an example then we are forced by the Apostle paul to not believe one single word of scripture since Paul tells us ALL men, including the prophets and apostles and himself are liars and does not exclude himself. Was Paul lying or making an brief exception to tell us the truth?

Neither. Do you believe the Bible is the words of mere men?

I believe scripture because it is God's Word. If it were the words of mere men, then it wouldn't be worth any more than say, the works of Plato or Homer.

Besides, if someone is a liar, it doesn't mean that every statement out of their mouth is false. You made that mistaken assumption earlier. A thief is still a thief even if he buys something with earned money, a murderer is still a murderer even if he doesn't kill everyone he meets, and a liar is still a liar even if he says something thats true.

One theft makes a man a thief. One murder makes a man a murderer. One lie makes a man a liar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Paul and the other bible writers tell us many times that we could lose our salvation (Matt. 7:18 Matt. 7:21, Matt. 12:30-32, Matt. 22:14, Luke 8:13, Luke 12:42-46, Luke 15:11-32, John 6:70-71, John 15:1-10, Rom. 11:20-23, John 17:12 John 6:37, John 6:39, John 6:40, John 6:44, John 10:27-28, Rev. 2:4-5, Rev. 3:4 Rev. 3:5, Exodus 32:33, Rev. 3:11, Rev. 13:10, 14:12 Rev. 21:7, Rev. 22:19 ).

None of those verses say that the person who sinned was actually saved to begin with.

Again, I John 3 says that saved Christians cannot sin. You are inventing more apparent contradictions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
This whole imputation theory is silly and leads to the problems of unauthentic justification where God must accept Luther’s repulsive idea of a saved sinner as a ‘snow covered dunghill’. God could never accept that sort of thin veneer and wants the genuine thing.

I agree with all of that. That's why I'm not a Lutheran.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Catholic however believe that a real interior change happens with a real authentic change of nature...

I'm with you so far here...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
...that is first begun in baptism but grown to perfection over one’s life in much the same way that a seed sprouts (within the heart). That is, under God’s nourishing grace (use the metaphor of rain and seasons [trials] etc.) that seed grows into a mature tree and eventually bears a fruitful vine that can produce good works suitable to God’s purpose for us.

...but then you stepped into nonbiblical la-la land.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
God’s grace is invoked through baptism.

God's grace doesn't need to be invoked. Jesus is already knocking at the door. All you have to do is accept Him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Let’s not get bogged down in semantics please just as acceptable prayer invokes God’s favor for things we need.

That sounds like the gimme-gimme-gimme-ism Christianity, like when athletes pray to win sports competetions.

God has a divine plan, and He's not going to change it all around just because someone submits an "acceptable prayer".

I don't pray for God to do stuff for me. I pray to do stuff for God. Can I get an amen here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
in which case that person commits a blasphemy for not trusting in the one time need for baptism. Didn’t you say you were baptized 2 times and also mention you do not sin?

My parents sinned when they "baptized" me as an infant in a Presbyterian church. I hadn't repented, and I didn't believe -- how could I? I was two months old. It wasn't a real baptism.

Besides, you say that baptism doesn't count unless it's done by someone with "apostolic authority", so by your reckoning it wasn't a real baptism either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
I can cite you at least 3 dozen scripture verses that prove you wrong.

You have already cited them, and I showed you how those verses fail to make your point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
I am skipping a few non value added comments you added here.
Non value added? You mean the comments where I showed how you flip-flop about the importance of rightly dividing the word, and where I questioned your priest's ability prove that he has apostolic authority according to the Biblical test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
The truth is that while true Christians abhor sin in our modern culture there are so many temptations and traps that one is bombarded daily with opportunities to sin

Then it's a good thing we saved Christians have the Holy Spirit living inside of us and CANNOT sin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
There are so many Baptists flavors I had no idea if your sects actually believed in water baptism – some ironically don’t and call themselves “Baptists”.

We are the kind who believe God and His Word.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
look at the OT topology of scripture and do a little simple exegesis – its all there and its profound and you won’t learn this in Sunday school.

If you believe Eve was a literary foreshadowing of Mary, then it sounds like you believe Eve was an allegorical character rather than a real person.

Of course I won't learn this in Sunday School, because it's nonsense. It's easy to take two people and come up with a short list of things they have in common. Kersey Graves did this when he wrote The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
We simply can’t say things that are counter to explicit commandments from Jesus even when there are some apparent contradictions in parts of scripture.

There is only an apparent contradiction if you believe that baptism is a requirement for salvation. I don't. I believe that a newly saved person will seek baptism as soon as possible, because Jesus commanded it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
I explained that it was not a water baptism and the thief received a baptism by desire. This is determined through exegesis of all the scriptures on baptism and Rom. 2:29 that tell us about: the “circumcision is that of the heart”, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not of men but God.

I think you use the word "exegesis" to mean taking out of context scriptures and creative interpretation, then stringing them together into a narrative that says what you wanted it to say in the first place. That's the only way to get a concept of "baptism by desire" out of scripture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
There is more to it I am afraid. Salvation is a living according to the New Covenant sealed by Baptism every day of one’s life and availing oneself frequently of the sacraments – especially Eucharist (Body and Blood of Christ as commanded).

You are confusing cause and effect. Living according to the New Covenant is a postcondition of salvation, not a precondition. A person who is saved will live accoding to the New Covenant as a natural, inevitable consequence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
It doesn’t matter – all the protestant solas contradict since none can stand alone with 5 of them. It’s a bogus and pure fabrication.

I agree. The only way to get either of them is to ignore about a third of the New Testament. I was just curious as to which one you had in mind.

I'm neither Catholic nor Protestant. I am a Baptist. Baptists are NOT Protestants.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Only Catholics understand it since we have the proper apostolic teaching as well as the proper authority to teach others.

So you keep asserting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
I have given you this.

No, you gave me a string of out of context verses that don't back up your claim.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Perspire to read what I have told you

I just read it all again. None of it backs up anything you say.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
And just how do you imagine you get your fallen nature through osmosis? Please don’t tell me you don’t have a belly button…

So sin is transfered from the mother to the child through the umbilical cord? But the Bible says that we are not punished for the sins of others (Dt 24:16, 2Kgs 14:6, Jer 31:29-30, Ez 18:20).

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Sorry – I was tired and it looked to me like your summary comments all used the words “justification” and I took you at your word without reading them all closely.

Just like how you read the Bible.

Pastor Billy-Reuben


Upon request I will cite scripture for all these facts in God's Holy Word.

✝ This is a Christian community and we worship GOD of the Holy bible, the only Living GOD. We worship Jesus Christ, Son of GOD and Savior. Anything else is absurd. ✝
Trump / Arpaio 2016 -- The Government We Deserve
#ChristianLivesMatter

Reply With Quote
(#112)
Old
Ezekiel Bathfire's Avatar
Ezekiel Bathfire Ezekiel Bathfire is offline
Pastor for Diversity and Tolerance
Christ's Rottweiler
 

One Year/1000 posts Saved 1 Year 1st Year Bible College 2nd Year Bible College 3rd Year Bible College 4th Year Bible College True Christian™ The Al E. Pistle Award for Excellence in Rebuking Christian Love Real American™ Tithing Manager Heaven Bound Protected by JESUS True Scientist™ Pastor of GOD Ex-Masturbator Super Soaker Baptism Award Ready for the Rapture True Christian Caucasian Senior Pastor Teabag Patriot TC Bravery Friend of Jesus Flat Earth Tell her once Persecuted Porn Resistant The Hatchet Child Rearing Award Ex-Brit Eats the Most Pork True Republican Ex-eurotrash Batman Shooting Survivor Loves a GODLY Chic-Fil-A Guns, Guts and GLORY! Proud Niglet Sponsorer Kirk Cameron Fan Club Nuts for JESUS! Prayer Warrior Touched by Jesus Stamp of Approval Rick Perry's Niggerhead Ranch Mower Donald Trump 2016! Anti-sodomy Pastor Ezekiel Aardvark Bathfire Crown of Life Alternative Facts Probing for Jesus 20,000 posts Saved 10 Years Proud TP Rebuker for Christ Anti-Biden

 
Posts: 22,727
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Toiling selflessly towards Salvation
Ezekiel Bathfire will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Ezekiel Bathfire will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Ezekiel Bathfire will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Ezekiel Bathfire will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Ezekiel Bathfire will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Ezekiel Bathfire will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Ezekiel Bathfire will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Ezekiel Bathfire will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Ezekiel Bathfire will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Ezekiel Bathfire will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Ezekiel Bathfire will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 08:40 PM

I rather hoped that I would have you see the light, and in some respects, you might have done. That said, I have diagnosed your problem with God: You think too much and believe in the catholic church rather than God’s Word.

I note that your replies are peppered with references to catholic dogma – I note also from the style that you are now restricting the number of these “catholic tradition says..”, “catholic studies show…”, “catholic tradition is…”, etc. you use and rightly too.

I see this as your faith in the catholic church and not a faith in God. Your faith in God is conditional upon your faith in the vicar of Rome’s edicts. You have earlier agreed that not all popes have been whiter than white, thus what of their edicts? And you are clever enough to know that one false assumption can lead to random and inaccurate conclusions.

I remind myself of Jesus in His, “as children / Heaven” speech and yet, here I see a sophisticated argument where many, many verses are drawn together to reach a questionable conclusion – a conclusion that, to all but a Jesuit, would smell fishy and that no childlike innocence would accept. I remind myself that of Christ’s comments to the Scribes and Pharisees on their adherence to ritual.

On Christ’s words to Peter (the rock, etc), and the actual transubstantiation, you must see that have to be taken as purely metaphorical. I recall being told of the latter at age 7 in Bible class (“Recognizing a papist”, second term.) I, as an innocent child, just could not accept the idea – I tell you now, bread and wine do not turn to the Flesh of Christ and His Blood. From which part of His Body would it originate, and what papist would consume it rather than display it as a relic? Has there ever been an autopsy on a priest immediately after he has taken the two?

You make repeated references to 30,000 Protestant sects – we are not Protestant. Nevertheless, the pope does not believe that all catholics believe the same thing, otherwise there would be no need for him or his minions. We may therefore say that there the same percentage of heretical catholics as there are Protestants and any idea that your outfit is not collegiate, is in error.

Now you are about to say that the above is applicable to Landover; Sir, let me disabuse you, it is not. By accepting the unadulterated and complete Word of God as written in KJV 1611, we here are in agreement. What disagreement could there be? Dogma? None. Ancient tradition? None. Intercession? Not needed. Apocrypha? Dispensed with. Saints? Only those God mentions as being saints. Mary… well, let’s just not go there. Graven images? None. Purgatory? No need to say its there then change our mind. Fish on Fridays and then change your mind? Not needed. The list goes on.

We have a simple approach – obey God Who is timeless and Whose Word is clear. Here the list has one entry – obey God.





“We must reassert that the essence of Christianity is the love of obedience to God’s Laws and that how that complete obedience is used or implemented does not concern us.”

Author of such illuminating essays as,
Map of the Known World; Periodic Table of Elements; The History of Linguistics; The Errors of Wicca; Dolphins and Evolution; The History of Landover (The Apology); Landover and the Civil War; 2000 Racial Slurs.
Reply With Quote
(#113)
Old
StarrKingGrad's Avatar
StarrKingGrad StarrKingGrad is offline
Unsaved trash
 
 
Posts: 161
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Berkeley, CA
StarrKingGrad is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.StarrKingGrad is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.StarrKingGrad is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.StarrKingGrad is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 10:10 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
That sounds like the gimme-gimme-gimme-ism Christianity, like when athletes pray to win sports competetions.

God has a divine plan, and He's not going to change it all around just because someone submits an "acceptable prayer".

I don't pray for God to do stuff for me. I pray to do stuff for God. Can I get an amen here?
No amen from me, since I see nothing wrong with asking the Creator for help, though I certainly agree that we should ask God what He wants us to do as well. I have some scripture on this point that I'd like you to explain, however. Jesus said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by John 15:7
If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.
So, Pastor BR, what is wrong with praying for God's assistance?


...as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity. Colossians 3:12-14 (emphasis mine)
Reply With Quote
(#114)
Old
ApoplecticFalseChristian's Avatar
ApoplecticFalseChristian ApoplecticFalseChristian is offline
Unrepentant Papist Dog
Forum Member
 
Posts: 40
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Place of Legends
ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 10:17 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post

Earlier, you said that Emperor Constantine's religious title was "Pontifex Maximus", meaning he was the head of the pagan priesthood in Rome.

I want you to look at this picture:
<img snipped>


That is a piece of art commissend by Pope Benedict XVI. It says "Benedictus XVI Pont(ifex) Max(imus) Anno Domini MMV Pont(ificatus) I"

It looks like the current Pope calls himself Pontifex Maximus, just like Emperor Constantine.
I don't have much spare time today to dismiss the full legion of conflicted things you say in the full text of this post here. But let me at least quickly dispatch this one sly innuendo and later come back to dispatch the balance of what does not stand up to scrutiny.

Firstly I must ask - are you trying to impugn the office the the pope by unjustly associating a prior statement I made about Constantine's pagan title Pontifex Maximus and extend it to the pope for less than honorable purposes? Disgraceful desperation brother ... tch tch tch.

Let me put this to bed very quickly.

To wit:
Yes - this term is used unofficially by the Catholic Church since it has historical linkage to titles taken by earlier popes that date as far back as Pope Gregory I (540-604 AD ) and by some historical accounts to Pope Leo I (440-461 AD) and allegedly to Pope Damasus I (366-384 AD); the latter pope being the one who codified the Christian cannon for all Christians (the same one in the KJV less the deuterocanonical books). One or more of these popes used the title "Pontifex Maximus". Please observe that it would be self effacing to try to slander the popes as "pagan" for using the high titles of the land since it was they (Damasus) who brought Christendom their cannon. We don't want to call the Bible pagan now do we?

What is important to understand is that the title Pontifex Maximus is ancient. It goes back to 600 or 800 BC or so and was used by the Romans - for kings and emperors and emperor-priests; the latter of course were notorious polytheist pagans. Please note too the term "King" in all its various linguistic forms also goes way way back to ancient pagan times and Jesus who we sometimes title as "Lord of Lords and King of Kings" is certainly not made pagan by humans extending the highest word title honors to Him with titles that extend from our ancient pagan histories. We must not forget that humans are until quite recently very much barbarian pagans for the majority of our human history and we are no where as civilized as we imagine (just watch what happens to "civilized" societies when economies collapse ). So where I am going is the obvious conclusion that the words and the titles we use have had to start somewhere in our language and history didn't they?

So, the inference you attempt is to call Constantine a pagan Pope and by association all popes. The simpleton logic is based on the presupposition that because a pagan supporter of Christianity used a then pagan title then others who use the title must be pagan too. This is circular since Constantine was never a pope - nor even a bishop and no pope had yet adopted that title to "Christen" its use. But he was one of the last emperors to use the title Pontifex Maximus (which was then certainly a pagan title). Now though it is highly appropriate that Christianity which came out of the cultural influence of Rome (on the Gentile side anyway) would have strong association of titles and concepts from that Roman legacy. So as Rome fell and the supremacy of Christianity comes into its own the popes assumed the highest titles of the land that the people and foreign rulers would recognize. Thus it was quite natural for the Roman branch of Christianity to maintain the Roman titles and to "Christianize" them (more like high jack) since these were the highest recognized titles of the land at that time and no one wanted to send emissaries all over the known world proclaiming new tiles to every warlord and thiefdom in existence.

None of this should be considered profound or remarkable since "Pontifex" relates to our term "Bishop" and so "Pontifex Maximus" becomes essentially "Bishop of Bishops" (the pope) under the new Christian genre.

ApostolicChristian


Matthew 16:18: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
2 Thess 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Reply With Quote
(#115)
Old
Pastor Billy-Reuben's Avatar
Pastor Billy-Reuben Pastor Billy-Reuben is offline
Senior Pastor
VP of Evangelical Outreach
On FIRE for Jesus
True Christian™

One Year/1000 posts Saved 1 Year Saved 5 Years 1st Year Bible College 2nd Year Bible College 3rd Year Bible College Saved 10 Years 4th Year Bible College 2008 Witch Hunt Award Long service medal, 1st class Christian Love True Christian™ The Al E. Pistle Award for Excellence in Rebuking Tithing Manager True Christian Provider™ award Ribfest '02 Real American™ Senior Pastor Heaven Bound TC Bravery Protected by JESUS Pastor of GOD Ex-Masturbator Super Soaker Baptism Award Ready for the Rapture True Christian Caucasian The Lord’s Witness Wound Jailed for JESUS Teabag Patriot Friend of Jesus Flat Earth Tell her once Persecuted Pro-Life Eats the Most Pork True Republican Guns, Guts and GLORY!

 
Posts: 6,016
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Libertydale, NC
Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!Pastor Billy-Reuben will sit at the right hand of Jesus Himself come the Glory!
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-13-2008, 11:27 PM

Sounds like someone is straining to do some explaining.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
Firstly I must ask - are you trying to impugn the office the the pope by unjustly associating a prior statement I made about Constantine's pagan title Pontifex Maximus and extend it to the pope for less than honorable purposes?
Not at all. I was showing you one of the many places where you had contradicted yourself.

Earlier when I said that Emperor Constantine was the first Pope, you said he couldn't have been Pope because he used the pagan title "Pontifex Maximus". However, the current Pope uses the same title.

Why would a Christian Pope assume the title of the Pagan high priesthood? Doesn't the Bible warn us to abstain from all appearance of evil?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
I don't have much spare time today to dismiss the full legion of conflicted things you say in the full text of this post here.
It's fine if you do and it's fine if you don't. You have been presented with the Truth of the Gospel. If you choose to hold fast to your false doctrines and reject the Truth, there's nothing I can do about it. I can post scripture until my keyboard breaks, but if your heart is hardened it won't make a bit of difference. It's in God's hands now. All I can do is pray for you, friend.

I'll just leave you with this to think about:

Josh 24:15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.

Pastor Billy-Reuben


Upon request I will cite scripture for all these facts in God's Holy Word.

✝ This is a Christian community and we worship GOD of the Holy bible, the only Living GOD. We worship Jesus Christ, Son of GOD and Savior. Anything else is absurd. ✝
Trump / Arpaio 2016 -- The Government We Deserve
#ChristianLivesMatter

Reply With Quote
(#116)
Old
Ahimaaz Smith's Avatar
Ahimaaz Smith Ahimaaz Smith is offline
True Christian™
True Christian™

True Republican

 
Posts: 2,546
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pastor Deacon Fred Hall, Landover Christian University School of Law, Freehold, Iowa, God's Country
Ahimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious RaptureAhimaaz Smith has discarded the shackles of sin and is ready to participate in the Glorious Rapture
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-14-2008, 01:58 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostolicFalseChristian View Post
I don't have much spare time today
Thank you, Jesus!

Quote:
We don't want to call the Bible pagan now do we?
No, just the New American Bible translation.

Quote:
What is important to understand is that the
Just a quick stylistic tip, you can eliminate a lot of words from your writing if you avoid phrases that add nothing, such as this one. Eight totally wasted words. Just dive right in and say what you want to say, boy.

Quote:
So where I am going is
Hell.

Quote:
Now though it is highly appropriate that Christianity which came out of the cultural influence of Rome (on the Gentile side anyway) would have strong association of titles and concepts from that Roman legacy. So as Rome fell and the supremacy of Christianity comes into its own the popes assumed the highest titles of the land that the people and foreign rulers would recognize.
That would explain the rampant pedophilic faggotry among the Catholic priesthood, too.... why invent new sexual abominations that you have to explain to everyone when you inherited a perfectly good set of perversions from the Romans?



Pour out thy fury upon the heathen that know thee not, and upon the families that call not on thy name.... Jeremiah 10:25
Reply With Quote
(#117)
Old
ApoplecticFalseChristian's Avatar
ApoplecticFalseChristian ApoplecticFalseChristian is offline
Unrepentant Papist Dog
Forum Member
 
Posts: 40
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Place of Legends
ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-14-2008, 02:39 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ahimaaz Smith View Post
Thank you, Jesus!

No, just the New American Bible translation.

Just a quick stylistic tip, you can eliminate a lot of words from your writing if you avoid phrases that add nothing, such as this one. Eight totally wasted words. Just dive right in and say what you want to say, boy.

Hell.

That would explain the rampant pedophilic faggotry among the Catholic priesthood, too.... why invent new sexual abominations that you have to explain to everyone when you inherited a perfectly good set of perversions from the Romans?
Oh cut me a break twerp. I was feeling sorry for you and was considering replying to your prior nonsense to try to give you proper apostolic teaching so you at least had a chance of being saved. But I can see now that you lack the manliness, the maturity and the intellect to be held accountable for your current mental and spiritual dysfunction and it will be better to let you go forward in life in invincible ignorance. Besides I don't generally respond to the minor league players looking to make a name for themselves by getting bloodied by better men.

At least your good Pastor Brother Billy while being nearly blind to the truth has the common courtesy to interact as an adult.

So welcome to "Mr. Iggy" - you are from this day forward forever ignored for your rude school-boy insolence. I'll pray that some day you grown up and become man enough to make it worthwhile for someone to give you the attention you crave.

ApostolicChristian


Matthew 16:18: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
2 Thess 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Reply With Quote
(#118)
Old
ApoplecticFalseChristian's Avatar
ApoplecticFalseChristian ApoplecticFalseChristian is offline
Unrepentant Papist Dog
Forum Member
 
Posts: 40
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Place of Legends
ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-14-2008, 04:58 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
My doctrine comes straight from a literal reading of in-context scripture. Your subtil points are loosely based on a combination of figurative interpretation, out-of-context scripture, and extra-biblical traditions.
Of course - this is your stock defense which means you have nothing of any real counter rebuttal substance to offer. I can now see the subtle humor in your choice of moniker brother Billy. I should have picked up on it sooner since the ratio of product-to-excretion has been rather tellingly thin and watery in these last episodes with you. Billy-Reuben, does sound remarkably like "Bilirubin" and the latter is in fact an excretion product whose levels are not controllable in the body. Thus, Bilirubin levels reflect the balance between production and excretion. But balance is an oxymormon since there is no "normal" level of bilirubin. How perfectly aprops and convenient to be accountable to no standards except your own private ones. Catholics can't have private interpretation of scripture since the apostle's taught our successor bishops how to divide scripture - after all Catholics wrote and assembled the bible.

Can you level with me Brother Billy? Do you imagine that your private interpretation of scripture is any better than anyone else's on the planet? I am trying to get a rough-in on the hubris levels. If I say "to-mato" and you say "ta-mato". I prefer my take on the dialect since I got mine from an apostolic teaching but only the devil and God know where you got yours.

As for subtlety ponder the fun wisdom here as a momentary diversion to see that where serpents once were used to tempt in Genesis in Christ they now are made to serve...

Matthew 10:16 (kjv) Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Wait, how did I make it impossible for infants and mentally impaired to profess belief? When was it ever possible for an infant to profess belief?
I figured it would go right over your head again Billy. I was hoping you Baptists cared a little more about the salvation of your children who are too young to profess their belief and might die before they get the baptism that Jesus told us we must have - 'bring the children to me'. So how do your Baptist children who die at an early age who can't yet have a well developed faith and who's parents prevented from being baptised get saved?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
When does the Bible say that one can profess belief on another's behalf? That sounds like a Mormon belief, where they posthumously baptize non-Mormons into the Mormon faith.
Nice try at subterfuge. You know very well that Catholics don't practice proxied baptism for the dead like Mormons do so why try to place Catholics into another one of the Baptists' favorite hate groups? Trying to demonize those that are sent to help you is not going to benefit you.

I have given you the scripture cases already that demonstrate that through another's faith (which is pragmatically identical to belief for this discussion) another person may be healed. It is only a minor extension of that same concept to see that sickness has always had a strong biblical association with some form of sin (original or personal) and to thereby infer that a person in good standing with God (a pious Christian) can bring a friend in need to Jesus through their faith. That is just a case of grace working through others as part of God's economy of salvation.

Matthew 9:5 For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
I never said I have not sinned, but now that the Holy Spirit is inside of me, I cannot sin any more.
And I am sad to say that I must tell you again that scripture calls you a liar.

Your "Once Saved Always Saved" doctrine was stolen from Calvin and modified but was never taught by any apostle. It was unheard of in the early church and the scourge of this heresy only comes into existence 1500 years distant from Christ's resurrection. There is simply no such biblical principal as "eternal security". Billy, you are preaching a new gospel and a new tradtion of man. There is no way to wiggle out of this one. Give even a single reference to any early Church father's writings to prove that The Church ever taught this. You can't - so please stop perverting God's word and please stop pretending to know what you are talking about. What you simply can't wrap your mind around is the temporal aspects of salvation being simultaneously a past, present and future event. In eternity there is no sense of time. The word "salvation" means nothing "here and now" unless it also means past and future. Salvation is only relevant as God judges you "saved" - period. But Billy, since you are teaching a false gospel you will not be one of those "saved" unless you stop sowing weeds of error in God's field. You have been warned and God will tell you this someday if you do not heed my words.

Matthew 24:13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
No one can resist temptation to sin through his own efforts. If that were possible, we wouldn't need God's Grace.
Don't go down the path of "easy believism" billy and try to make the case that we are not accountable for our own actions and choices. That's a cop out - we must cooperate with God's grace through free will. We can't just toss our hands up and say "salvation is all God's problem" and play the role of a mindless robot.

Sure, Billy, there was no need to put forth any commandments and obey Christ since God will force us to obey Him so we can't sin right?...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
1 John 1:8-10 is not talking about committing new sins. It is talking about the sins that we committed before we got saved. Basically, it is saying that God forgives but doesn't forget.
Nonsense. You have no rational sense of temporal context. Salvation is simultaneously a past, present and future event. Get that into your head. I know this is a bit hard to wrap your mind around - meditate on it.

Basically God is saying he will remember your sins no more (if you get them forgiven through baptism or through sacramental confession).

Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Before you again falsely accuse of inserting my own "bias" into this scripture, 1 John 3:9 says that born again Christians CANNOT sin. There are no contradictions in the Bible, but there are plenty of contradictions between the Bible and your doctrine.
You can't use 1 John 3:9 as a proof text for OSAS - sorry God is not going to let you pervert his word. You must look at EVERY case in scripture where we are told dozens and dozens of times to avoid sin and to confess our sins in public before the Church if we do sin. Why do you think Jesus gave us "The Lord's Prayer" to be prayed daily and to forgive daily so we can be forgiven daily???

Further you must also account for John's other verses that call you a liar if you say that you do not sin. If you are going to insist on a literal read you are going to have to be consistent and accept all that He said...

1 John 1:8-10
8If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

You are hanging your entire salvation on that one prior verse Billy while ignoring others. Guess what that makes you Billy? Yup, you are a typical Protestant/Baptist Bible-Verse Cherry Picker. You go for the stuff that looks good and tastes good while ignoring the other things that are less settling.

There now I have told you the truth that you have it wrong and its going to land you in hell if you keep preaching this lie.

OSAS is utterly wrong but I need to discern which flavor of OSAS poison you believe in to tailor my exorcism for you Billy. I am going to give it my best to save you brother. Yes, I am praying for you (The Divine Mercy Chaplet).

Are you trying to say that by fiat the sinful things you used to do become magically "unsinful" when you imagine in your own mind that you are "saved" like the Lutherans do?

Or are you saying that when you stop doing sinful things that is a sign that you are saved and you can no longer sin? But if you sin again in a week, or a month or a year or in 10 years then you were not really saved and you got to go back and get a new baptism after repenting again? I hope you keep your baptismal clothes bro cuz you are going to have to go back to be dunked again (uselessly) every few weeks...

If the first case then you are sinning to profess and demonstrate your faith and trust in God's grace (putting God to the test) and saying you are not responsible for your own actions - which of course will land you the deepest hell. But if its the latter case then you are simply deceiving yourself but will not be pushed so deeply into hell (if that is any comfort to you) as the prior case.

Either way I am going to pray for you. But for now RUN FROM the perverse doctrine of OSAS like your life depended on it. I am not kidding - its snake oil. Every-time you sin you will say "oh my, I guess I was not really saved - let's try again tomorrow". Guess what - you will be doing that all your life (per 1 John 1:8-10). So you should convert to become Catholic since you can at least get assurances of forgivness of sins in sacramental confession - even daily if need be and sincerely resentful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
You accuse me of inserting my own bias into scripture, but you need to consider the beam in your own eye. The passage you quoted says we need to confess our sins, but doesn't say anything about a requirement to confess them to someone with "apostolic authority". The Bible doesn't say that anywhere. I confessed my sins directly to God.
Oh bologna Billy - use your defensive counter-measures metaphors properly. The beam thingie is for those who are judging you as an enemy and to elevate themselves in their own eyes. I am just trying to wake you up and save your butt. I get nothing out of this other than a new brother if I can do my job. Let me give you more medicine here:

James 5:16 - James clearly teaches us that we must “confess our sins to one another,” not just privately to God. James 5:16 must be read in the context of James 5:14-15, which is referring to the healing power (both physical and spiritual) of the priests of the Church. Hence, when James says “therefore” in verse 16, he must be referring to the men he was writing about in verses 14 and 15 – these men are the ordained priests of the Church, to whom we must confess our sins.


Acts 19:18 - many came to orally confess sins and divulge their sinful practices. Oral confession was the practice of the early Church just as it is today.

Matt. 3:6; Mark 1:5 - again, this shows people confessing their sins before others as an historical practice (here to John the Baptist).

1 Tim. 6:12 - this verse also refers to the historical practice of confessing both faith and sins in the presence of many witnesses.

1 John 1:9 - if we confess are sins, God is faithful to us and forgives us and cleanse us. But we must confess our sins to one another.

Num. 5:7 - this shows the historical practice of publicly confessing sins, and making public restitution.

2 Sam. 12:14 - even though the sin is forgiven, there is punishment due for the forgiven sin. David is forgiven but his child was still taken (the consequence of his sin).

Neh. 9:2-3 - the Israelites stood before the assembly and confessed sins publicly and interceded for each other.

Sir. 4:26 - God tells us not to be ashamed to confess our sins, and not to try to stop the current of a river. Anyone who has experienced the sacrament of reconciliation understands the import of this verse.

Baruch 1:14 - again, this shows that the people made confession in the house of the Lord, before the assembly.

1 John 5:16-17; Luke 12:47-48 - there is a distinction between mortal and venial sins. This has been the teaching of the Catholic Church for 2,000 years, but, today, most Protestants no longer agree that there is such a distinction. Mortal sins lead to death and must be absolved in the sacrament of reconciliation. Venial sins do not have to be confessed to a priest, but the pious Catholic practice is to do so in order to advance in our journey to holiness.
Matt. 5:19 - Jesus teaches that breaking the least of commandments is venial sin (the person is still saved but is least in the kingdom), versus mortal sin (the person is not saved).

I will try to wade through the other stuff you wrote later,
ApostolicChristian


Matthew 16:18: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
2 Thess 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Reply With Quote
(#119)
Old
Elder Holiday's Avatar
Elder Holiday Elder Holiday is offline
Unsaved Trash, mormon Cultist
 
 
Posts: 69
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Provo, Utah
Elder Holiday is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.Elder Holiday is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.Elder Holiday is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-14-2008, 06:15 AM

Here at my Church we baptise so many people who used to be in the false Catholic religion. They all feel so great and then freely admit that the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon that Jesus Christ talked about. But how can one false religion, the Baptists, call another false? Didn't Jesus tells us to judge righteously? I don't think you are doing that.


We do not allow false Christian websites to be publicized. --ADMIN
Reply With Quote
(#120)
Old
ApoplecticFalseChristian's Avatar
ApoplecticFalseChristian ApoplecticFalseChristian is offline
Unrepentant Papist Dog
Forum Member
 
Posts: 40
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Place of Legends
ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.ApoplecticFalseChristian is a sorcerer and idolater who follows false gods and will rot in Hell.
Default Re: Why Roman Catholic Papists Are NOT Christians - 11-14-2008, 03:45 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastor Billy-Reuben View Post
Earlier when I said that Emperor Constantine was the first Pope, you said he couldn't have been Pope because he used the pagan title "Pontifex Maximus". However, the current Pope uses the same title.

Why would a Christian Pope assume the title of the Pagan high priesthood? Doesn't the Bible warn us to abstain from all appearance of evil?
...
Pastor Billy-Reuben
Really Billy, I can see that logic is not your strong suit. Parochialism is never going to get you saved bro.

Why would God let the KJV translators bestow the title on Jesus of "Lord of Lord and King of Kings" in their rather infantile renderings commissioned under the Protestant King James (self appointed head of the Protestant Church) when the lordy title of "King" is historically and equally bestowed with honor to pagan kings who precede even David? Eh? The term King is often applied equally in the literature to ancient pagan rulers who predate Abraham by millenium. And if you look at the psalm 2 reference below you will see that the translators even put the word "King" on God's lips in a complaint against the evil leaders of men.

I must wonder from the KJV's anachronistic 17th century language of "Lords, Ladies and Gentlemen" how many Baptists, simple in the faith, imagine Jesus and the apostles wandering about the biblical lands in top hats and Johnny Walker-boots professing "the good news"?

As an aside it is most peculiar that you insist against all historical evidence that Baptists are not Protestants while demanding your ecclesial community all use the Bible that was "authorized" by a Protestant King. It seems to me in taking on the language of King James and the vernacular of his book you all are submitting yourselves to the whims of just about anyone who puts on the title of "King" . Bravo - an argument painted quite competently into the corner bro.

Here's the coup de grâce to the whole nonsense:

King Nebakanezer was a Babylonian king, He ordered the hanging gardens of "Babylon" to be built (meaning" Gates of the Gods") by 612 bc, He also laid siege in Jerusalem for a year and then sacked it. Ergo this usage of King shows it as a title of pagans. If we want to limit ourselves to the bible as our history book (Which it is not) then we can see that one of the very first references to a monarchy is inferred from Genesis to the evil Nimrod who had a kingdom - therefor he too was a "king".

Daniel 4:1 (kjv)
Nebuchadnezzar the king, unto all people, nations, and languages, that dwell in all the earth; Peace be multiplied unto you.

Genesis 10:8-10 (kjv)
8And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.
9He was a mighty hunter before the LORD: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD. 10And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.

Revelations 19:16 (kjv)
And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

QED:
King is a pagan title and Jesus uses it. Does that make Jesus a pagan in your silly system of reckoning?

Now that we have put down your silly ides let's turn this encounter into a positive learning experience yes?

I want you to see that there is a ongoing pattern of great struggle ongoing from the beginning of time between those pagan kings who rejected God from the time of the flood to this day. I want you to see how Jesus is God's response to Nimrod's haughty attack against God's justice in bringing the flood. Many of us think that the ancient poems of Gilgamesh are in fact King Nimrod. Research the link I here give of evil King Nimrod "the Rebel" the bible called "hunter" [but of men, in bitter opposition to YHWH]. We now generally believed Nimrod to be none other than the epic url=http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/nimrod.html]Gilgamesh[/url], who is the biblical son of Cush son of HAM son of Noah.

It is not surprising in current modern context to know that Nimrod is the forefather to the men who built the tower of babel. The pluralism of dialectic factions seen in what some wrongly call Christendom 's 33,000 Protestant sects is babel once again attempting to re-manifest itself as a babel of truth in opposition to God. Catholics know better.

Psalm 2 (KJV)
1Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
3Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
4He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the LORD shall have them in derision.
5Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
6Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. [ed: profound prophesy!!!!]
8Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
9Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
10Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
11Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. 12Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

I trust this encounter has been enlightening if not humbling.

Have a great day,
ApostolicChristian


Matthew 16:18: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
2 Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
2 Thess 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
bible study, catholics are not christians, history, idolatry, jesus, mary worshipers, paganism

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Find Additional Forums Here



Powered by Jesus - vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
Content Landover Baptist Forums © 1620, 2022 all rights reserved