And to clarify what will happen to false religion? Revelation 17:16, 17 says: "And the ten horns that you saw, and the wild beast, these will hate the harlot and will make her devastated and naked, and will eat up her fleshy parts and will completely burn her with fire. For God put [it] into their hearts to carry out his thought, even to carry out [their] one thought by giving their kingdom to the wild beast, until the words of God will have been accomplished."
5 have fallen: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece. one is (at the time of John's writting) Rome, one is yet to come: Future European Superstate/ Holy Roman Empire. these are 7 who have enslaved Israel. or ruled over us, and then the Lord will restore the Kingdom to Israel.
The Catholic Church or Rome suprisingly is not the beast of revelation...Read Daniel, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Zechariah, Revelation very closely.... As the Torah speaks of a Middle Eastern "Assyrian" that is a conquerer in the last days, not a Roman (Or E.U.)....And if you are wondering who is "the whore" that RIDES the beast, that should be a no-brainer for most.....Compare the end-times of Islam, (The Mahdi, Isa/Muslim Jesus) to the end-times of the Bible...
The Jesuits of Rome are using Protestant Britain & Protestant America to carry out a Papal Crusade in our name against the Shia Muslims. George W Bush is in the Skull & Bones Society - the Skull and Cross Bones is the trademark of the Jesuits. Tony Blair is a Popes Knight of Malta. The KoM were formed roughly a thousand years ago to launch Crusades for Rome exactly as Jesuit puppet Blair did in Iraq. Mariolatry = Babylonianism. The Jesuits are rebuilding Babylonia as we speak (Iraq, Dubai etc).
Israel is Jerusalem, America is the New Jerusalem.
Zion will come from heaven to the New Jerusalem to become the city of God!
Babylon are the nations in sin. In this case, America now can be called Babylon, but it has the commandment of God to be purified (through the Savior Jesus Christ) or be entirely destroyed.
Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.
People have gotten all wrong.The USA is not the 2nd beast from Revelation.The 2nd beast from Revelation comes from the ashes of the Roman empire itself which is intertwined with the 1st one.The 2nd beast has been around long before the USA could come to exist.The 1st beast is the 7th resurrection of the Holy Roman empire and likewise the 2nd beast has to be rooted up with pagan Rome as well so to speak.
The USA did not originate from pagan Rome.People still don't get it!.
The US was not around at the time the book of Revelation was written. The Roman emprire was although. We can assume the Papal Roman Empire was kingdom that was "to come" as it alone has caused the death and persecution of millions if not billions of Christians most recently in the last century in Eastern Europe during WW2.
get your facts right, the current catholic rome has not fallen, if you read in matthew 16 18 - 19 it clearly says the gates of hell will not prevail against Gods church. Jesus told St.Peter to go out and build his church, and Peter did that when he traveled to rome, and for 2000 years the church has had sucessors of st. peter, and nothing has changed. since st. peters papacy. seriosly, stop being a hypocrite by claiming someone to be false profet when are being one yourself. God Bless +++
But Rome and it's church is not God's: it is property of Antichrist! Your Pope will institute the shedding of the blood of the Saints, now that he has his Unholy Roman Empire now emerging from the EU.
This is the biggest bullshit ever...The United States of America is the New Babylon and the Masons are behind it...and they're trying to eliminate the people of GOD which is us the Roman Catholics. They try to frame the church with phony allegations of molestation and other scandals...but they will not succeed.
Uuumm just so you knwo I dont follow elen whites teachings I read my king james bible and yes it says right in my bible the 7th day is Gods day of rest I have read the catholic church instituted sunday sabbath and sunday sabbath is not biblical either what is your excuse oh it was nailed to the cross they said that about the 10 comandments but its not so they still apply for today so really you need to give your head a shake.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You Protestants are a JOKE. Your still making these false and ridiculous accusations about the Catholic Church being a key driver in the New World Order.
Your ancestors did the same thing during their time and were wrong. You keep doing this because it's a BIG MONEY business for you. Shame on your Sect !
TheRealTruth77... please purchase and read the book entitled "the keys of this blood" written by malachi martin, you will find statements in the book which support the view that the papacy sees itself as the rightfull head of a new world order
Malachi Martin was an ex-jesuit who left the Church.
I don't care what a ex-jesuit thinks and his theories. My lord is none other then Jesus Christ who was True God and True Man.
Christ's promises are the only promises that never fail, and he tells me and every other Christian that " Not even the gates of hell can prevail against his Church."
Contact Scott Hahn, who was a prominent Protestant who became Catholic, also contact Alex Jones, he was an ex-penetacostal.
my friend i will allow Scipture to direct my path, according to Scripture the Church of the last days will be small, many are called but few are chosen, how large is the Catholic Church?
Lazbo, let me clear some things up that you are assuming.
We have been in the "Last Days" for a long time....Scripture guides true Catholics as well and it is up to God who is saved or not.
What's your point with the Catholic Church being large?......Of course it is....Christ established her and that's why there are so many Christians, it's a testament to God's power. Having alot of members does not invalidate the Church.
You call 16m members small? Sure, the catholic church has 1b members, but if you were around as long as their group was, yours would be that big, given the rate at which it's growing.
The jehovah witnesses have around 7m active members, and mormons around 13m...so you can see that the churches that started around the same time as the adventists are growing at roughly the same rate as you.
Allowing scripture to guide your path is good, but it allow to guide your whole path
come out of her my people lest ye partake of her plaques come out of sunday keeping and enjoy the true sabbath not according to man but to god come out of her.
Come out of Seventh Day Adventist Churches my people lest ye partake of her (Ellen White's) false teachings....keeping and enjoying the true faith.....not according to Ellen White but Jesus Christ who commissioned St. Peter to lead the Church. Amen
People if your country has LEGALIZED GUN OWNERSHIP,buy more,stock up and don't give in to the Jesuit GUN CONFISCATION,why they want your guns because so its easy to force things that you don't want on you and its time ot fightback
The papacy through her Jesuit Order. The fourth beast to arrive out of the earth which is diverse from all the others and exceeding dreadfully..
The NWO is all part of Satan's worldwide revolt against God the Creator. Catholics must turn to the Lord and repent. Flee from your idols. You're all living in a Babylonian confusion..
"I can't speak for George Bush, but if he is in the process of becoming a Catholic, and he is serious about it,than he will have to renounce publicly all ties he may have with any secret order or society"
This is why there is no compromising with the Vatican and their sick followers, they will choose popery and all the lies and reject a free Republic and it's Constitution.
Shall we we debate European History, hans?
I will use my Encyclopedias for my source and you? Vatican twisted history.
I can't speak for George Bush, but if he is in the process of becoming a Catholic, and he is serious about it,than he will have to renounce publicly all ties he may have with any secret order or society, he will have to renounce the devil and his works, and he will have to do anything in his power to repay for what he may have done wrong in God's eyes. Even a devil worshipper may convert to Jesus Christ. That's God's plan.
St.Petre was the first Bishop of Rome.His seat, the Cathedra Petri, is kept till today,even Tertullian is a witness to this. Matth.10,2;..first Simon,who is called Petre. St.John 21,15;..feed my lambs,..take care of my sheep...feed my sheep.Matthew 16,18;..and i tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock i will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. When Jesus explicitly confirms that the Church will NEVER be conquered, how can a Pope be Antichrist?
Peter is the rock. It's Latin for rock. The Rock on which the Church is built. On several occasions Christ indicates that it is this special pupil who will lead the Church, and all of his successors, till the day, He will return in Glory. It may be, that some Bishops have gone astray, have become Freemasons,maybe even devil worshippers, but the Church itself will never perish. Nor her infallible teachings, for they are insured by the Holy Spirit.
I know there are some indications of a cooperation with non-Christian forces and even outright devil worshipping cults, or secret societies, still i do not agree with the allegations of the Papacy being the instrument of the Devil. I just can't believe that.
why can't you believe it? i did not reject catholicism without thoroughly looking into it's beliefs and customs, many of which are not Scriptural. I believe that there are many genuine people in the RCC but the system has fallen away from the Truth my friend. Please do not take my comments as a personal attack, please look into the teachings and their origins for yourself.
I don't take it as a personal attack. I too see this world being dragged into a pit unlike anything we've seen so far and i think the only way out is the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave the last drop of His Blood to redeem us and to save us from an everlasting pain. I believe God's Word, the Bible. I believe that the other religions are lies or at least distractions created by the power of Satan. I wish more people would pray for the Holy Spirit otherwise i fear many will lose their soul forever.
If the devil was going to focus his energies on something, would it not be the "church" which Christ founded? Duh......! I can assure you that he began the subversion with Peter's Denial of Xt. With the horrid trajectory of the Donation of Constantine - where the Church married Mammon.
It has only gotten worse. Why do you think that God has sent Mary as messenger telling the clergy to repent since 1851? The ignored & twisted the messages - suppressing the inconvenient truth!
Correct. Christ is the head & foundation stone; Peter was selected as a human leader of the Ekklesia which Christ founded. He did not say Church, as that is a Germanic word which did not exist for another 800 years!
Ekklesia = outcalling; a people call out; the Elect. An organization governed by consensus doing what they did in Acts. That was all subverted in 325AD.
ok, since u have responded to me, i'd like to become ur friend, and i'm very insterested in an open dialogue. let me know if ur interested in an open dialogue, so we can exchange emails, and even phone #s.
we will look at doctrines of both sides catholic/protestants: sola scriptura, sola fid, purgatory, papacy, the eucharist.... and go through biblical passages and see which ones does the bible support and teaches about, and which ones are man made theories that do not trace further than the 16th century. coool ?
and i will limit my discussion with u within the boundaries of holy scripture (bible), since u as a protestant neither believe in the magisterium of the church nor the appostolic tradition, u believe that the bible is the only authoritative word of God,
and that neither the ecominical counsils that were constantly held by the catholic church to define doctrines at different peroids in history, and canonized what u know as bible today are authoritative nor the appostolic tradition that itself gave rise to the scriptures which u carry today in your hands.
kazzazi... it is good to talk, i am gratefull to you for your respectfull comments and am also prepared to share dialogue with you. I accept the Bible as the Creator's guiding light i also believe that He has blessed His people at certain times with the Spirit of Prophecy.
ok, its good to hear these words from u, and as far as i can tell ur an open minded person and willing to listen to what others outside of your faith have to say. as a matter of fact, im interested in knowing the common grounds between my faith and yours, so we can start our dialogue from things that we both agree on as authoritative. this is why i selected the bible, since we both consider the bible as authoritative.
let me know if u consider early christian wirttings of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries as authoritative as well. these ancient inscriptions are witten by people known as the early church fathers. these early church fathers are the bishops of the early church who were ordained by the 12 apostles themselves as their successors to continue the journy of the church after the apostles' death.
i believe that the early church fathers were honest and upstanding men though i have to admit to not having read much of their material. I believe that anything said at any time by anyone which in no way contradicts the Scripture to be worthy of study.
ok, ill bear with u, and i'd like to ask u to bear with me too due to the fact that im a university student, and i have to prepare for that as well.
thats a really good things to hear from u, that u do acknowledge historical referrences from the early church. thus if ur interested i would include that in our open dialogue in addition to the holy scripture.
and yes they are in no way contrary to holy scripture, and as a matter of fact, these men are the ones who defended the orthodoxy
i will bear with you also and i pray that the Father blesses you with the knowledge , wisdom and understanding needed to achieve your goals at university.
Incase you do not know i am a Seventh Day Adventist and have been for roughly 11 years before becoming SDA i had no connection whatsoever which any form of organised religion. I was into many unGodly things and thank Christ for the deliverance i have thus far experienced.
I thought sharing a little info about myself would maybe be usefull
i would love to get to know u more. im a catholic, and im doing a research about the early church. i went through tones of things, and i tried different churches: evangelical, baptist, orthodox..... just name it. to me faith should not contradict with pure non-bias reason. neither did faith contradict with reason in the early church, and ill show u biblical passsages that prove that, just give me time to look for them again.
so by the light of natural reason which all humanity shares in common. if protestants have accepted the canon of scriptures both old and new testuments that were preserved and canonized for them by the authority of the church throughout the ecumenical counsils, why dont they accept that same church authority today?
the second things that i would like to point out is that Christ did not institute a bible, if he did please show me one scriptural passage in which he says to his followers: "here this scripture came down to me from heaven, take it and it shall be your guide". however, in serveral biblical passages Christ did say that he instituted a church " a gathering of men" in which he entrusted unto them an authority to bind and loose.
i believe that Christ established the authority of the Old Testament in His life and words, as He lived by the guidelines contained therein. Yes He did institute a church as He instituted a nation, Israel, as described in the Old Testament. The history of Israel is recorded for the edification of "Spiritual" israel, the church (1Corinthians 10) they apostatised and needed to experience reformation as the Church has apostatized throughout it's history resulting in the reformation.
just to fix your information on something. the first protestant reformation was in the 16th century.
according to what i concluded from what u said is that the first 4 or 5 centuries of the catholic church early christianity, (notice im useing catholic church for early christianity because thats the term the church fathers of the early church used over and over again in their writtings) u said the church was good at that time.
and then im pretty sure u believe that the church went back to being good after the time of the protestant reformation, this is ur final destination right? ok i would love to hear from u a logical answer about the church between the 5th century and the 16th century. if the church was corrupted, then everyone must have perished. just tell me what happened to the promise of the Lord when he said in matthews gospel "and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it ie. his church" ?
i believe that ultimately Christ's followers are the church and i believe that the church is still in the process of reformation. As for the 5th to 16th centuries i believe that during this time the RCC was falling away from the truth and introducing unbiblical doctrines and practices such as.... indulgences, the rosary, infant baptism amongst other things.
as for the time interval between the 5th and the 16th centuries which is more than a thousand years, when according to your openion the RCC was falling and deviating. now more than 1000 years is a really long time, in which more than 30 generations of humanity were born and died. just give me one logical and reasonable answer about where God was seeing these many generations perish and did not do anything about it...
therefore, my point is, a "protestant reformation" was first claimed in the early 16th century on the basis that "the church" went corrupted for over 1000 years loool. now the fruits of this reformation between the 16th century and today is 35000 denominations which equally exist in status today, and each equally believes itself to contain the truth of Christ.
now for God's sake answer me logically and reasonably, and answer everyone who is watching this debate. which one of these 35000 "different truths" about salvation which equally exist in status today is the truth that humanity should embrace???
i have indeed measured each one of the 35000 truths that equally exist in status today. and i have seen how much each has deviated from scripture in their own way accusing the other truths lol to have gone wrong.
each one of these 35000 different truths lol, has accepted scripture as their ultimate spiritual guide and authority "sola-scriptura". yet according to each one's private interpretations of scripture, they took the parts from scripture that suited their ideas "literally". and the parts in scripture which did not suite their ideas literally, they symbolized them or declared them to be metaphors. so which one of these 35000 different interpretations of scripture is the infalible one?
and if whatsoever, private interpretations of holy scripture were not subject to infaliblity as statistics clearly reveal about "protestant reformers" and their history eversince the 16th century. then why not take the parts that dont suite u litterally such as: Christ gave peter a primacy over his fellow desciples (luke 22:32) peter's faith will strengthen his brethern.
and (john 21:17) when our blessed Lord instructed peter 3 times to "feed his lambs", "tend his sheep", and "feed his sheeps", by common sense it cannot be a metaphor referring to "any pastor", since by common sense christ said this to peter alone literally. if Christ was not referring in this to peter alone, then could u please be kind and show me where in the bible does christ give the same authority to someone else?
and (mark 16:7) after the resurrection "but go tell his (desciples and Peter) that he is going before u to galilee". my friend, if holy scripture itself did not recognized peter as having special primicy among the other desciples, then why does according to your common sense scripture repeatedly calls the company of the 12 as "desciples" and emphisizes "peter" alone? if u really think that this is the only scriptural passage that does this, then u better think again.
and (acts 2:14), the holy spirit came upon the desciples all, it didnt come upon peter alone. according to your common sense, if peter did not preside the gathering of the first church, then why was it him that stood up and spoke on behalf of his fellow desciples ??
and (acts 1:15 to 1:26) when mattias was chosen to replace judas. according to your common sense, if peter did not preside the first church that our blessed Lord instituted, then why was he the one to stand up among the brethren and instruct that someone else must fill up for judas?
and (acts 15:7) when the gathering of the early church and the elders called for a counsil to resolve the first moral doctrine which (note according to the jewish faith, you cannot be saved unless ur circumsized) took place. according to your common sense, if peter did not preside the first ecumenical counsil in the church, then why was he the first to stand up, and the first to declare the first moral doctrine in the church, and then james spoke up after in favour ??
how do i know that this counsil of (acts 15:7) was the first ecumenical counsil in the church? very easy. simply reading it, it tells u that the appostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. also at the end of the counsil, james suggested to send out a letter to the gentiles informing them of the new "dogma" the counsil has "canonized", and instructing them on what they should do.
and so my dear friend, this is what the catholic church exactly believes about the office of the pope. it believes that the bishop of rome ie. pope is the sucessor of peter, and in an ecumenical counsil (when the bishops of the univseral churchs gather) to resolve an issue just like that of (acts 15:7) he should stand up like peter did and canonize a doctrine regarding morals and faith to resolve that issue that the church is going through during his time.
now does this mean that the pope does this by himself? by no means. if the catholic church believes that the pope does this by himself, then whats the point of a counsil (gathering of the bishops and elders of the universal churches) ? the catholic church precisely defines her doctrines of faith and morals to resolve issues in a ecumenical counsil of all bishops under the primacy of the bishop of rome successor of peter.
now im pretty sure ur thinking that "hey if Christ taught his desciples everything about faith and morals, then whats the point of the RCC defining new doctrines about faith and morals" ? if ur thinking that Christ taught his desciples everything they need to know about faith and morals, then u better think again.
very clearly from (acts 15:7), those who were appostles and preaching the good news to the gentiles disputed over the issue of circumcision. according to your openion, if Christ taught his desciples from the begining that circumcision was not naccessary for salvation, then why was the council of (acts 15:7)held???
if u cannot answer this i can answer it for u. Christ did not cover all topics with his desciples in his 3 years time of ministry. but what he did is this: read (matthew 16:13 all the way to 16:20). Christ gave the Keys of the kingdome of heaven to peter alone, in which he told him "whatsoever u binde on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever u loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
u dont believe that he gave it to peter alone? ok! refer me to a scriptural passage in which Christ gives the "Keys" (provided that it mentions the word Keys) to someone else of the desciples and i'll except your argument as valid.
if ur not able to provide such a scriptural passage, then ur gonna have to accept my argument as valid, that indeed peter alone was given the "keys" of the kingdome of heaven. if u can neither provide such a scriptural evidence nor accept the validity of my argument, then before all witnesses here "you are seeing the truth with your own eyes and deneying it" ok??
one more thing my dear beloved friend. so far i have asked u so many questions that u have not come back to me with an answer. and for those only few questions that u have answered so far, i would appreciate it if u can answer me more reasonably so that a healthy mind can accept your arguments as valid.
please my dear beloved, i would appreciate it if u take ur time in studying my questions, and answer them in a more reasonable way than that u have already tried.
"The keys of the kingdom of heaven" are the words of Christ. All the words of Holy Scripture are His, and are here included. These words have power to open and to shut heaven.
but thats not what the scripture from matthew is saying litterally. litterally this scripture from matthew is saying that Christ is telling peter what you(peter) binde on earth shall be bound in heaven .... see? didnt i tell u earlier protestants litteralize what suites them, and symbolize what does not suite them? ur just proving this. this passage does not suite u in its litteral sense, thus ur interoducing a method to interpret it to through away its tru meaning.
Peter himself, writing by inspiration, applies this prophecy to Jesus. He says, "If ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious: unto whom coming, a living stone, rejected indeed of men, but with God elect, precious, ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house." 1 Peter 2:3-5, R. V.
"Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." 1 Cor. 3:11. "Upon this rock," said Jesus, "I will build My church." In the presence of God, and all the heavenly intelligences, in the presence of the unseen army of hell, Christ founded His church upon the living Rock. That Rock is Himself,His own body, for us broken and bruised. Against the church built upon this foundation, the gates of hell shall not prevail.
yes ok, this protestant interpretation of this scriptural passage is old, i've heard of it. it is as old as the reformation 16th century interpretation. if u really believe that this interpretation is older, then be kind please, and provide me with a document earlier than the 16th century showing that this interpretation is earlier than the 16th century.
it is not a "protestant interpretation" it is the obvious interpretation based upon many texts throughout the Old and Knew testaments, which certainly do pre-date the 16th century. Do you genuinly not accept Christ as the Rock of the Church?
if ur not able to support ur interpretation of this scripture with an official document that traces back further than the 16th century, let me know so i can support my interpretation of this passage with documents from the early fathers of the church that trace back to the 4th, 3th, 2nd centuries. by the way u have to abide to your word that the church fathers were honest men and upstanding.
i do believe that those men were honest and upstanding, i did not say that i agreed with all they wrote nor did i suggest that they correctly interpreted the Scripture. It is possible to be honest and upstanding and at the same time wrong.
earlier today you asked me to provide evidence from a catechism of the popes claims to be God. i am waiting for you to respond to the reply i gave you
i am going to my bed now it is late, no doubt i will find more comments from you tomorrow. Please consider some of the things i have asked and said as i consider that which you have asked and said
by the way lazbo, as far as i got to know about u, is that ur name is mark and u live in the united kingdome. my name is muhannad kazzazi and i live all the way in canada. umm, yes for sure i will study carefully the points u expressed, and i'll look for answers for them. but one thing i wonna say, if whatsoever i keep quoting and u keep quoting and we never agree, i would like to keep hatred outside.
my friend i can assure you that no hatred will develop during the dialogue we share i respect you and your opinions. As stated in my last comment... i will consider that which you have asked and said.
umm sorry just another thing i wanted to say. u just mentioned to me that u asked a couple of questions that i have not answered yet, yes ur right, and as i said earlier, i will look into your questions, study them, and come back to u. But also, if u check our dialogue from the begining there are many questions that i asked that remained unanswered. so i suggest now that u treat me as u want me to treat u, and if u like just take your time to study all my questions.
nothing new established in this meeting, just the settling of a dispute between converted Jews and converted Gentiles about the validity of circumcision.
show me one scriptural referrence from any one of the 4 Gospels, that Jesus Christ in the 3 years of his ministry teaching his desciples that "circumsion is not nassessary for salvation" and ill accept the validity of ur argument. go..
by the way, i asked u for a logical and a reasonable answer about the 35000 different truths lool that equally exist in status today. is that your best logical and reasonable answere u were able to come up with?? i thought u were more reasonable than this. do u not realize that each one of the 35000 different denominations has equally memorized the bible, and concluded that his truth is the truth lool ??
and u still didnt answer me logically and reasonably about the more than 1000 years of church heading to corruption, and about themore than 30 generations of humanity that was bron and died during that time interval. what was God doing in your openion seeing all these people perishing out of no fault of their own???
just because u wanted to compare isreal to the church. do u know the time interval between moses (founder of that nation) and Christ?? it is historically estimated to be 1250 years between moses and Christ. which is 'approximately' equal to the time interval between 4th century christianity, and the time of reformation 16th century.
now my question is this: do u think during that time interval in isreal(moses to christ) God left generations and generations of humanity perish without devine intervention? obviously not, since that would be contrary to the canon of the old testument, when in that time interval God sent many prophets to lead and guide his people "properly". scripture is "full" of powerfull wintnesses about that, just open the old testument and go through the prophets.
now since God did not leave generations and generations of humanity to predition in that time interval of isreal. im gonna keep on emphisizing on my original point, where was God or what was he doing seeing these many generations of humanity perish between the 4th and the 16th centuries, when the first "protestant reformation" appeared for the first time in the historical record of the church ???
one more thing that protestants always always always fail to realize. the reformation that took place in the church of the old testument ie. isreal was done by infalable men. how do i know that, easy read the bible and it will tell u that those who did the reforms were "prophets". now im pretty sure u will feel frustrated about the word infalable because its usually used by catholics to refer to the office of the pope. but i'd like to explain to u what that word means.
this word does not mean "without a sin", sin has nothing to do with the meaning of this word. it simply means that these men were devinely inspired. when God inspires men to preach and reform, im pretty sure u believe that he is able to keep his revelation that comes to people (through these men) free of human error. as a result, what they preach to their audience should be accepted as authoritative and infalible.
by the way, im still waiting for you to provide me with a scriptural evidence in which Christ gives his decisples a canon of scripture, in which he tells them "here this is a canon of scriptures, take it as your authority and guidelines to live according to"....
however, according fundamentalist reformers lol, the bread and wine are devine sacraments. because according to them this is mentioned in scripture very clearly, and as a matter of fact, evangelicals cannot be saved because they have disobeyed this scriptural passage ".....truly truly, i say to u unless u eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood, u have no life in u....." read from john 6:35 all the way to 6:71.
now the thing that i wonna point out to u clearly is the following: evangelical and fundamentalist protestants are 2 common examples out of the 35000 protestant denominations (including u guys), which equally exist today (not nassesarily in number, but in status), and each equally believes that they have maintained the truth in them, though they disagree on fundamental things regarding salvation.
also in several biblical passages Christ did promise this church "gathering of men" that he will be with them til the consumption of age!!! and we know for fact, that this promise was not only given to that early gathering only, since he said "til the consumption of age", therefore the promise was to them and to the continuity of that church that he himself founded.
just for your information, over the course of the 1st 4 centuries of the church, more than 80 gospels existed, and they still exist today in the musiums and elsewhere. it is these fathers of the church that im talking about that acknowledged the ligitimacy of the 4 gospels that are canonized today in the new testument out of the more than 80 that existed as authoritative. and by the "universal/catholic/ecumenical" counsils starting in the 4th century they put the canon of scripture
hello again my friend, i have heard of other gospels, i believe that God inspired men to compile the books that make the whole Bible as we have it today. i do believe that God established a body of men (the church), i believe He also gave us prophecies revealing that the church would fall away from the Truth (2 Thessalonians 2, Revelation 6). I have been to Catholic churches and do not feel comfortable with what i have experienced.
hello, im glad u mentioned (2 thessalonians 2, and revelation 6) as your scriptural evidence about "the church" heading to corruption. first i would like to deal with 2 thessalonians 2. we both agree that a deciever will arise sometime and teaches false doctrines, and proclaim himself to be God. but what i disagree with u on is that this deciever would be the bishop of rome ie. the pope for the following reasons :
reason number 1) is common sense. paul did not only wirte a letter to the thessalonians, he wrote several letters among which a letter to the church of the "romans". as a matter of fact, if however that prophecy of paul was referring to the bishop of rome ie. the pope later on, then it would have made a lot more sense that this scriptural passage would be found in the letter to the "romans" instead of the letter to the thessalonians.
reason number 2) is historical. as for the bishop of rome ie. the pope, provide me with one referrence from the catechism of the catholic church (since it is in the catechism where you find what the catholic church trully teaches about what it believes) stating that the "pope is God and should be worshiped" or something like "the pope has a devine nature which makes him = to God". if u cannot provide such an evidence, then based on what did u protestants conclude that this figure is the pope??
"The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth...by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils...
here we go again, you are confusion papal authority with divinity. first of all, vicor of someone does not mean that this person carries the same nature of that someone, in which if Christ is devine, then the pope must also be devine Noo. it simply means a representative or spokesman. and ill show u several scriptural passage clearly showing that peter was given this position from Christ himself.
cont... the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth."
by the way, the fact the catechsim of the catholic church instruct us that the pope is the head of the universal church, and is infalible under conditions, which is fully scriptural. however u still did not show me where catholics believe that the pope is God, and that we should worship him....
reason # 3) is that the false doctrines being taught by the catholic church in your openion ie. indulgences, the rosary, infant baptism. ill wait for your answers to what i asked from u earlier ie. reason #1 and reason#2, then we'll go through these doctrines one by one as slow as u wish.
now here the question comes, just because the prophet moses was a sinner, i know that he was a sinner from holy scripture because scripture tells me that he killed an ejyptian. do u not believe that regardless of his sinful nature the revelation that God gave him was infalible? just answer me and we'll carry on our open dialogue here before all witnesses, since u were affraid to give out your # and email when i asked u for them earlier.
my friend you are sadly beginning to make assumptions, i am not afraid of giving my email or phone number to anyone, i felt that discussion in this public forum would be adequate for now. Yes Moses killed an Egyptian and yes "All have sinned" (Rom 3:23) but if a person does not repent, and Moses did repent, the Most High cannot speak through them. Moses accepted the Law and by faith kept it therefore he was used by God to speak on His behalf.
u have made another biblcal mistake here "if persona does not repent, the most high does not speak through them. " a careful reading of scripture shows that moses disobeyed God again during the time God was using him to bring to his people the revelation. when moses came down from the mount and found the people corrupted, God told him to break the tablets only once and he broke them twice. God had a reason to tell him to break it once, but moses disobeyed God.
repentance is neccessary from sin in order not to go to hell as the bible clearly teaches. however, this was not the argument between u and i. the true agrument was "show me a scriptural passage saying that moses repeted from his murdered in order for God to use him to speak through him to his people". and i didnt see any reply on that yet.
"and Moses did repent, the Most High cannot speak through them." u said moses did repent from murder so that God could speek through him. exodus 2:12 is when moses killed the egyptian, read it 'all the way' to 3:12 when God called him and instucted him on what to do. just show me one word in scripture that says moses "repented" from the murder he committed in order that God can used him.
notice, that im only using bible so far, i have not stepped out of the boundaries of holy scripture. and from only bible ill provide solid proofs that the doctrines of your church are wrong one after the other
it seems as though you have gone on the attack, apologies if i am mistaken. I am willing to answer any of your questions about the doctrines of my church and look forward to furher dialogue
ok now u apparently agreed that though moses was a sinner his revelation was infalible. tell me whether u agree on this or not first so we can go further on from here
And to clarify what will happen to false religion? Revelation 17:16, 17 says: "And the ten horns that you saw, and the wild beast, these will hate the harlot and will make her devastated and naked, and will eat up her fleshy parts and will completely burn her with fire. For God put [it] into their hearts to carry out his thought, even to carry out [their] one thought by giving their kingdom to the wild beast, until the words of God will have been accomplished."
cbmuzik 9 months ago
5 have fallen: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece. one is (at the time of John's writting) Rome, one is yet to come: Future European Superstate/ Holy Roman Empire. these are 7 who have enslaved Israel. or ruled over us, and then the Lord will restore the Kingdom to Israel.
narlycat 11 months ago
@narlycat
Let me clarify that. You're correct about the 5 world powers who have passed, but they are as follows:
1. Egypt
2. Assyria
3. Babylon
4. Medo-Persian Empire
5. Greece
6. Rome
The one that is? The Anglo-Saxon world power, the marriage of Britain and America.
The eighth is yet to be realized, but it's emergence according to Revelation is VERY near at hand.
cbmuzik 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
IMPORTANT!
whaleDOTto/b/popeDOThtml
TruthFearsNoLiar 1 year ago
What a bunch of bullshit. You dumb evengelical fools.
logicalthinker78 1 year ago
I'm not here to attack Catholics, but it is the papal government to fear..
WHen the deadly wound is healed it will once again become the Church Militant
unleashing the INQUISITION..
afzpuppet 1 year ago
@afzpuppet
They aren't the one with the deadly wound.
Myhopeisinhim 8 months ago
If you believe something that can't be proven by scripture discard it.
Myhopeisinhim 1 year ago
Guys if you arent looking for truth you wont see it
GPSDARFM 1 year ago
The Catholic Church or Rome suprisingly is not the beast of revelation...Read Daniel, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Zechariah, Revelation very closely.... As the Torah speaks of a Middle Eastern "Assyrian" that is a conquerer in the last days, not a Roman (Or E.U.)....And if you are wondering who is "the whore" that RIDES the beast, that should be a no-brainer for most.....Compare the end-times of Islam, (The Mahdi, Isa/Muslim Jesus) to the end-times of the Bible...
theanswerr007 2 years ago
The Jesuits of Rome are using Protestant Britain & Protestant America to carry out a Papal Crusade in our name against the Shia Muslims. George W Bush is in the Skull & Bones Society - the Skull and Cross Bones is the trademark of the Jesuits. Tony Blair is a Popes Knight of Malta. The KoM were formed roughly a thousand years ago to launch Crusades for Rome exactly as Jesuit puppet Blair did in Iraq. Mariolatry = Babylonianism. The Jesuits are rebuilding Babylonia as we speak (Iraq, Dubai etc).
Islandretreat 1 year ago
strikerhiryu, just wondering how one would bring the NWO criminals to justice (when they are the one who dictate justice to others ?)
enniopat 2 years ago
How do you explain such confusion connected with "God's word",
surely God would be clearer!
maybe it's fallible man's word (?)
enniopat 2 years ago
America is babylon the great. that all the nations will burn with fire
megaman2160 2 years ago
Error, America is the Land of God and is in sin now. It got to be purified with fire so can become the Zion of our God.
Bring the NWO criminals to justice!
strikerhiryu 2 years ago
there is no Error. america is the whore of babylon. america is not gods land. israel is
megaman2160 2 years ago
Israel is Jerusalem, America is the New Jerusalem.
Zion will come from heaven to the New Jerusalem to become the city of God!
Babylon are the nations in sin. In this case, America now can be called Babylon, but it has the commandment of God to be purified (through the Savior Jesus Christ) or be entirely destroyed.
strikerhiryu 2 years ago
America is not the new jerusalem. which false prophet told you that?
megaman2160 2 years ago
No one, the scriptures (I guess you believe in the Bible)
strikerhiryu 2 years ago
Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
Rev. 3:12
strikerhiryu 2 years ago
We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.
AoF 10
strikerhiryu 2 years ago
Jesuralem is the promised land of the faithful jews.
New Jerusalem is the promised land of Ephraim and Manasseh.
strikerhiryu 2 years ago
People have gotten all wrong.The USA is not the 2nd beast from Revelation.The 2nd beast from Revelation comes from the ashes of the Roman empire itself which is intertwined with the 1st one.The 2nd beast has been around long before the USA could come to exist.The 1st beast is the 7th resurrection of the Holy Roman empire and likewise the 2nd beast has to be rooted up with pagan Rome as well so to speak.
The USA did not originate from pagan Rome.People still don't get it!.
boyjay4utube 2 years ago
The US was not around at the time the book of Revelation was written. The Roman emprire was although. We can assume the Papal Roman Empire was kingdom that was "to come" as it alone has caused the death and persecution of millions if not billions of Christians most recently in the last century in Eastern Europe during WW2.
jakemoll 2 years ago
get your facts right, the current catholic rome has not fallen, if you read in matthew 16 18 - 19 it clearly says the gates of hell will not prevail against Gods church. Jesus told St.Peter to go out and build his church, and Peter did that when he traveled to rome, and for 2000 years the church has had sucessors of st. peter, and nothing has changed. since st. peters papacy. seriosly, stop being a hypocrite by claiming someone to be false profet when are being one yourself. God Bless +++
Catholic00012 2 years ago
But Rome and it's church is not God's: it is property of Antichrist! Your Pope will institute the shedding of the blood of the Saints, now that he has his Unholy Roman Empire now emerging from the EU.
willcobbett 2 years ago
the pope is the false prophet but not the head he is a critical part though
Spoken 2 years ago
Please dont use scrolling text again, VERY ANNOYING.
JudgeEden 2 years ago 2
God bless the Catholic Church :)
JeromeCaruana 2 years ago
CAtholics are full of it. the pope is a joke. no one should bow down to a man and thats all he is
B4mytyme 2 years ago
Such drivel. Is everyone in the USA insane?
kpman 2 years ago
AWESOME!!! LIKE THE MUSIC TO LOL
bigiveee 2 years ago 2
I'm against the false teachings of Catholicism but also 7 day Adventist who claim that Jesus is the angel Michael.
CBALLEN 2 years ago
Comment removed
lifeizgood33 2 years ago
what form of Gematria are you using? cause I ain't getting 666
stupaod 2 years ago
Comment removed
lifeizgood33 2 years ago
This is the biggest bullshit ever...The United States of America is the New Babylon and the Masons are behind it...and they're trying to eliminate the people of GOD which is us the Roman Catholics. They try to frame the church with phony allegations of molestation and other scandals...but they will not succeed.
GiuVene 2 years ago
I agree about the united states but that does not mean that the pope is not a part of the NWO plans
stupaod 2 years ago
"Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do."
gELmatriz771 2 years ago
Uuumm just so you knwo I dont follow elen whites teachings I read my king james bible and yes it says right in my bible the 7th day is Gods day of rest I have read the catholic church instituted sunday sabbath and sunday sabbath is not biblical either what is your excuse oh it was nailed to the cross they said that about the 10 comandments but its not so they still apply for today so really you need to give your head a shake.
Utube7372009 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You Protestants are a JOKE. Your still making these false and ridiculous accusations about the Catholic Church being a key driver in the New World Order.
Your ancestors did the same thing during their time and were wrong. You keep doing this because it's a BIG MONEY business for you. Shame on your Sect !
TheRealTruth77 3 years ago
TheRealTruth77... please purchase and read the book entitled "the keys of this blood" written by malachi martin, you will find statements in the book which support the view that the papacy sees itself as the rightfull head of a new world order
don't take my word for it, listen to your leaders
lazbo4174 3 years ago 2
Malachi Martin was an ex-jesuit who left the Church.
I don't care what a ex-jesuit thinks and his theories. My lord is none other then Jesus Christ who was True God and True Man.
Christ's promises are the only promises that never fail, and he tells me and every other Christian that " Not even the gates of hell can prevail against his Church."
Contact Scott Hahn, who was a prominent Protestant who became Catholic, also contact Alex Jones, he was an ex-penetacostal.
TheRealTruth77 3 years ago
Ran out of room before.....but in closing as you say go and speak to famous Ex-Protestants who became Catholic and ask them why they left their Sect
TheRealTruth77 3 years ago
The Most High Will reveal who His real children are in the near future, please read Revelation 12:17 to find out for yourself who they are.
lazbo4174 3 years ago 2
my friend i will allow Scipture to direct my path, according to Scripture the Church of the last days will be small, many are called but few are chosen, how large is the Catholic Church?
lazbo4174 3 years ago
Lazbo, let me clear some things up that you are assuming.
We have been in the "Last Days" for a long time....Scripture guides true Catholics as well and it is up to God who is saved or not.
What's your point with the Catholic Church being large?......Of course it is....Christ established her and that's why there are so many Christians, it's a testament to God's power. Having alot of members does not invalidate the Church.
That is faulty reasoning on your part buddy.
TheRealTruth77 3 years ago
@lazbo4174
You call 16m members small? Sure, the catholic church has 1b members, but if you were around as long as their group was, yours would be that big, given the rate at which it's growing.
The jehovah witnesses have around 7m active members, and mormons around 13m...so you can see that the churches that started around the same time as the adventists are growing at roughly the same rate as you.
Allowing scripture to guide your path is good, but it allow to guide your whole path
Myhopeisinhim 1 year ago
come out of her my people lest ye partake of her plaques come out of sunday keeping and enjoy the true sabbath not according to man but to god come out of her.
Utube7372009 3 years ago
Come out of Seventh Day Adventist Churches my people lest ye partake of her (Ellen White's) false teachings....keeping and enjoying the true faith.....not according to Ellen White but Jesus Christ who commissioned St. Peter to lead the Church. Amen
TheRealTruth77 3 years ago
@TheRealTruth77
Have you ever looked into some of your traditions, such as, crossing(t) yourselves when you pray?
Myhopeisinhim 1 year ago
Hear hear!
DavyJonesLumey 3 years ago
Why is it that when a man brings his wife to the Pope she has to dress like a widow?
D2
SilverRedIndigo 3 years ago
come hear about the blood!
atenorforjesus 3 years ago
People if your country has LEGALIZED GUN OWNERSHIP,buy more,stock up and don't give in to the Jesuit GUN CONFISCATION,why they want your guns because so its easy to force things that you don't want on you and its time ot fightback
ErichRaeder 3 years ago
You are basically on the right track! Consider:
1. Ratzinger's exact family origin is hidden.
2. He is not Bavarian.
3. His mother was illegitimate as was her mother. South Tyrol is really Italian, which has many of dubious ethnicity.
4. His Coat of Arms has a black beast, a black king, the occult shell of Minerva, no tiara, and an obvious phallic symbol with occult Maltese crosses.
5. He is Opus Dei's man
6. Prior to coming to the Vatican in '83, his career is rather vague - few details.
19lfm12 3 years ago
The papacy through her Jesuit Order. The fourth beast to arrive out of the earth which is diverse from all the others and exceeding dreadfully..
The NWO is all part of Satan's worldwide revolt against God the Creator. Catholics must turn to the Lord and repent. Flee from your idols. You're all living in a Babylonian confusion..
Islandretreat 3 years ago
"I can't speak for George Bush, but if he is in the process of becoming a Catholic, and he is serious about it,than he will have to renounce publicly all ties he may have with any secret order or society"
This is why there is no compromising with the Vatican and their sick followers, they will choose popery and all the lies and reject a free Republic and it's Constitution.
Shall we we debate European History, hans?
I will use my Encyclopedias for my source and you? Vatican twisted history.
leonvoltaire 3 years ago 2
"Even a devil worshipper may convert to Jesus Christ"
Dude, he has already pledged to the Jesuit General, Pope and Satan, stop being so naive.
He is a closet Catholic and open Nazi!
leonvoltaire 3 years ago 2
I can't speak for George Bush, but if he is in the process of becoming a Catholic, and he is serious about it,than he will have to renounce publicly all ties he may have with any secret order or society, he will have to renounce the devil and his works, and he will have to do anything in his power to repay for what he may have done wrong in God's eyes. Even a devil worshipper may convert to Jesus Christ. That's God's plan.
hans421 3 years ago
the Anti-christ will be a Jew.
hans421 3 years ago
Papacy founded by Nimrod at Babylon? first Pope was st. Peter, Jesus'his cherished pupil.
hans421 3 years ago
hans421... Scriptural support please
lazbo4174 3 years ago
St.Petre was the first Bishop of Rome.His seat, the Cathedra Petri, is kept till today,even Tertullian is a witness to this. Matth.10,2;..first Simon,who is called Petre. St.John 21,15;..feed my lambs,..take care of my sheep...feed my sheep.Matthew 16,18;..and i tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock i will build my Church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. When Jesus explicitly confirms that the Church will NEVER be conquered, how can a Pope be Antichrist?
hans421 3 years ago
you seem not to understand the verse you quote, Christ is the Rock certainly not Peter.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
Peter is the rock. It's Latin for rock. The Rock on which the Church is built. On several occasions Christ indicates that it is this special pupil who will lead the Church, and all of his successors, till the day, He will return in Glory. It may be, that some Bishops have gone astray, have become Freemasons,maybe even devil worshippers, but the Church itself will never perish. Nor her infallible teachings, for they are insured by the Holy Spirit.
hans421 3 years ago
peter (Petros) is actually greek for a piece of rock or small stone.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
I know there are some indications of a cooperation with non-Christian forces and even outright devil worshipping cults, or secret societies, still i do not agree with the allegations of the Papacy being the instrument of the Devil. I just can't believe that.
hans421 3 years ago
why can't you believe it? i did not reject catholicism without thoroughly looking into it's beliefs and customs, many of which are not Scriptural. I believe that there are many genuine people in the RCC but the system has fallen away from the Truth my friend. Please do not take my comments as a personal attack, please look into the teachings and their origins for yourself.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
I don't take it as a personal attack. I too see this world being dragged into a pit unlike anything we've seen so far and i think the only way out is the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave the last drop of His Blood to redeem us and to save us from an everlasting pain. I believe God's Word, the Bible. I believe that the other religions are lies or at least distractions created by the power of Satan. I wish more people would pray for the Holy Spirit otherwise i fear many will lose their soul forever.
hans421 3 years ago
If the devil was going to focus his energies on something, would it not be the "church" which Christ founded? Duh......! I can assure you that he began the subversion with Peter's Denial of Xt. With the horrid trajectory of the Donation of Constantine - where the Church married Mammon.
It has only gotten worse. Why do you think that God has sent Mary as messenger telling the clergy to repent since 1851? The ignored & twisted the messages - suppressing the inconvenient truth!
19lfm12 3 years ago
Correct. Christ is the head & foundation stone; Peter was selected as a human leader of the Ekklesia which Christ founded. He did not say Church, as that is a Germanic word which did not exist for another 800 years!
Ekklesia = outcalling; a people call out; the Elect. An organization governed by consensus doing what they did in Acts. That was all subverted in 325AD.
19lfm12 3 years ago
I know the pecking order of this world now.
1 satan (his name I shall never capitalize)
2 The black pope
3 the pope.
These are the evil rulers of this world.
Ammyai 3 years ago
Really good video! I actually have fellow Christians claiming that Bush hasn't bowed the knee to the pope...I say baloney!
Alexandra22773 3 years ago
Almost all the influencial people in the World (maybe even all of them) have bowed their knee to him, for he is the real master of world events
thanks for the comment
lazbo4174 3 years ago
protestants have memorized all the verses in the bible, but understand nothing out of it.
kazzazi 3 years ago
please qualify your statement with proof my friend
lazbo4174 3 years ago
ok, since u have responded to me, i'd like to become ur friend, and i'm very insterested in an open dialogue. let me know if ur interested in an open dialogue, so we can exchange emails, and even phone #s.
kazzazi 3 years ago
we will look at doctrines of both sides catholic/protestants: sola scriptura, sola fid, purgatory, papacy, the eucharist.... and go through biblical passages and see which ones does the bible support and teaches about, and which ones are man made theories that do not trace further than the 16th century. coool ?
kazzazi 3 years ago
and i will limit my discussion with u within the boundaries of holy scripture (bible), since u as a protestant neither believe in the magisterium of the church nor the appostolic tradition, u believe that the bible is the only authoritative word of God,
kazzazi 3 years ago
and that neither the ecominical counsils that were constantly held by the catholic church to define doctrines at different peroids in history, and canonized what u know as bible today are authoritative nor the appostolic tradition that itself gave rise to the scriptures which u carry today in your hands.
kazzazi 3 years ago
kazzazi... it is good to talk, i am gratefull to you for your respectfull comments and am also prepared to share dialogue with you. I accept the Bible as the Creator's guiding light i also believe that He has blessed His people at certain times with the Spirit of Prophecy.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
ok, its good to hear these words from u, and as far as i can tell ur an open minded person and willing to listen to what others outside of your faith have to say. as a matter of fact, im interested in knowing the common grounds between my faith and yours, so we can start our dialogue from things that we both agree on as authoritative. this is why i selected the bible, since we both consider the bible as authoritative.
kazzazi 3 years ago
let me know if u consider early christian wirttings of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd centuries as authoritative as well. these ancient inscriptions are witten by people known as the early church fathers. these early church fathers are the bishops of the early church who were ordained by the 12 apostles themselves as their successors to continue the journy of the church after the apostles' death.
kazzazi 3 years ago
i believe that the early church fathers were honest and upstanding men though i have to admit to not having read much of their material. I believe that anything said at any time by anyone which in no way contradicts the Scripture to be worthy of study.
ultimately the Bible is the final authority
lazbo4174 3 years ago
at times i may not reply for long periods of time due to my busy scedule, please bear with me my friend
lazbo4174 3 years ago
ok, ill bear with u, and i'd like to ask u to bear with me too due to the fact that im a university student, and i have to prepare for that as well.
thats a really good things to hear from u, that u do acknowledge historical referrences from the early church. thus if ur interested i would include that in our open dialogue in addition to the holy scripture.
and yes they are in no way contrary to holy scripture, and as a matter of fact, these men are the ones who defended the orthodoxy
kazzazi 3 years ago
i will bear with you also and i pray that the Father blesses you with the knowledge , wisdom and understanding needed to achieve your goals at university.
Incase you do not know i am a Seventh Day Adventist and have been for roughly 11 years before becoming SDA i had no connection whatsoever which any form of organised religion. I was into many unGodly things and thank Christ for the deliverance i have thus far experienced.
I thought sharing a little info about myself would maybe be usefull
lazbo4174 3 years ago
i would love to get to know u more. im a catholic, and im doing a research about the early church. i went through tones of things, and i tried different churches: evangelical, baptist, orthodox..... just name it. to me faith should not contradict with pure non-bias reason. neither did faith contradict with reason in the early church, and ill show u biblical passsages that prove that, just give me time to look for them again.
kazzazi 3 years ago
so by the light of natural reason which all humanity shares in common. if protestants have accepted the canon of scriptures both old and new testuments that were preserved and canonized for them by the authority of the church throughout the ecumenical counsils, why dont they accept that same church authority today?
kazzazi 3 years ago
the second things that i would like to point out is that Christ did not institute a bible, if he did please show me one scriptural passage in which he says to his followers: "here this scripture came down to me from heaven, take it and it shall be your guide". however, in serveral biblical passages Christ did say that he instituted a church " a gathering of men" in which he entrusted unto them an authority to bind and loose.
kazzazi 3 years ago
i believe that Christ established the authority of the Old Testament in His life and words, as He lived by the guidelines contained therein. Yes He did institute a church as He instituted a nation, Israel, as described in the Old Testament. The history of Israel is recorded for the edification of "Spiritual" israel, the church (1Corinthians 10) they apostatised and needed to experience reformation as the Church has apostatized throughout it's history resulting in the reformation.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
just to fix your information on something. the first protestant reformation was in the 16th century.
according to what i concluded from what u said is that the first 4 or 5 centuries of the catholic church early christianity, (notice im useing catholic church for early christianity because thats the term the church fathers of the early church used over and over again in their writtings) u said the church was good at that time.
kazzazi 3 years ago
and then im pretty sure u believe that the church went back to being good after the time of the protestant reformation, this is ur final destination right? ok i would love to hear from u a logical answer about the church between the 5th century and the 16th century. if the church was corrupted, then everyone must have perished. just tell me what happened to the promise of the Lord when he said in matthews gospel "and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it ie. his church" ?
kazzazi 3 years ago
i believe that ultimately Christ's followers are the church and i believe that the church is still in the process of reformation. As for the 5th to 16th centuries i believe that during this time the RCC was falling away from the truth and introducing unbiblical doctrines and practices such as.... indulgences, the rosary, infant baptism amongst other things.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
as for the time interval between the 5th and the 16th centuries which is more than a thousand years, when according to your openion the RCC was falling and deviating. now more than 1000 years is a really long time, in which more than 30 generations of humanity were born and died. just give me one logical and reasonable answer about where God was seeing these many generations perish and did not do anything about it...
kazzazi 3 years ago
therefore, my point is, a "protestant reformation" was first claimed in the early 16th century on the basis that "the church" went corrupted for over 1000 years loool. now the fruits of this reformation between the 16th century and today is 35000 denominations which equally exist in status today, and each equally believes itself to contain the truth of Christ.
kazzazi 3 years ago
now for God's sake answer me logically and reasonably, and answer everyone who is watching this debate. which one of these 35000 "different truths" about salvation which equally exist in status today is the truth that humanity should embrace???
kazzazi 3 years ago
measure each church oranization against the final authority, the Bible
lazbo4174 3 years ago
i have indeed measured each one of the 35000 truths that equally exist in status today. and i have seen how much each has deviated from scripture in their own way accusing the other truths lol to have gone wrong.
kazzazi 3 years ago
each one of these 35000 different truths lol, has accepted scripture as their ultimate spiritual guide and authority "sola-scriptura". yet according to each one's private interpretations of scripture, they took the parts from scripture that suited their ideas "literally". and the parts in scripture which did not suite their ideas literally, they symbolized them or declared them to be metaphors. so which one of these 35000 different interpretations of scripture is the infalible one?
kazzazi 3 years ago
and if whatsoever, private interpretations of holy scripture were not subject to infaliblity as statistics clearly reveal about "protestant reformers" and their history eversince the 16th century. then why not take the parts that dont suite u litterally such as: Christ gave peter a primacy over his fellow desciples (luke 22:32) peter's faith will strengthen his brethern.
kazzazi 3 years ago
and (john 21:17) when our blessed Lord instructed peter 3 times to "feed his lambs", "tend his sheep", and "feed his sheeps", by common sense it cannot be a metaphor referring to "any pastor", since by common sense christ said this to peter alone literally. if Christ was not referring in this to peter alone, then could u please be kind and show me where in the bible does christ give the same authority to someone else?
kazzazi 3 years ago
and (mark 16:7) after the resurrection "but go tell his (desciples and Peter) that he is going before u to galilee". my friend, if holy scripture itself did not recognized peter as having special primicy among the other desciples, then why does according to your common sense scripture repeatedly calls the company of the 12 as "desciples" and emphisizes "peter" alone? if u really think that this is the only scriptural passage that does this, then u better think again.
kazzazi 3 years ago
and (acts 2:14), the holy spirit came upon the desciples all, it didnt come upon peter alone. according to your common sense, if peter did not preside the gathering of the first church, then why was it him that stood up and spoke on behalf of his fellow desciples ??
kazzazi 3 years ago
and (acts 1:15 to 1:26) when mattias was chosen to replace judas. according to your common sense, if peter did not preside the first church that our blessed Lord instituted, then why was he the one to stand up among the brethren and instruct that someone else must fill up for judas?
kazzazi 3 years ago
and (acts 15:7) when the gathering of the early church and the elders called for a counsil to resolve the first moral doctrine which (note according to the jewish faith, you cannot be saved unless ur circumsized) took place. according to your common sense, if peter did not preside the first ecumenical counsil in the church, then why was he the first to stand up, and the first to declare the first moral doctrine in the church, and then james spoke up after in favour ??
kazzazi 3 years ago
how do i know that this counsil of (acts 15:7) was the first ecumenical counsil in the church? very easy. simply reading it, it tells u that the appostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. also at the end of the counsil, james suggested to send out a letter to the gentiles informing them of the new "dogma" the counsil has "canonized", and instructing them on what they should do.
kazzazi 3 years ago
and so my dear friend, this is what the catholic church exactly believes about the office of the pope. it believes that the bishop of rome ie. pope is the sucessor of peter, and in an ecumenical counsil (when the bishops of the univseral churchs gather) to resolve an issue just like that of (acts 15:7) he should stand up like peter did and canonize a doctrine regarding morals and faith to resolve that issue that the church is going through during his time.
kazzazi 3 years ago
now does this mean that the pope does this by himself? by no means. if the catholic church believes that the pope does this by himself, then whats the point of a counsil (gathering of the bishops and elders of the universal churches) ? the catholic church precisely defines her doctrines of faith and morals to resolve issues in a ecumenical counsil of all bishops under the primacy of the bishop of rome successor of peter.
kazzazi 3 years ago
now im pretty sure ur thinking that "hey if Christ taught his desciples everything about faith and morals, then whats the point of the RCC defining new doctrines about faith and morals" ? if ur thinking that Christ taught his desciples everything they need to know about faith and morals, then u better think again.
kazzazi 3 years ago
very clearly from (acts 15:7), those who were appostles and preaching the good news to the gentiles disputed over the issue of circumcision. according to your openion, if Christ taught his desciples from the begining that circumcision was not naccessary for salvation, then why was the council of (acts 15:7)held???
kazzazi 3 years ago
if u cannot answer this i can answer it for u. Christ did not cover all topics with his desciples in his 3 years time of ministry. but what he did is this: read (matthew 16:13 all the way to 16:20). Christ gave the Keys of the kingdome of heaven to peter alone, in which he told him "whatsoever u binde on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever u loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
kazzazi 3 years ago
u dont believe that he gave it to peter alone? ok! refer me to a scriptural passage in which Christ gives the "Keys" (provided that it mentions the word Keys) to someone else of the desciples and i'll except your argument as valid.
kazzazi 3 years ago
if ur not able to provide such a scriptural passage, then ur gonna have to accept my argument as valid, that indeed peter alone was given the "keys" of the kingdome of heaven. if u can neither provide such a scriptural evidence nor accept the validity of my argument, then before all witnesses here "you are seeing the truth with your own eyes and deneying it" ok??
kazzazi 3 years ago
one more thing my dear beloved friend. so far i have asked u so many questions that u have not come back to me with an answer. and for those only few questions that u have answered so far, i would appreciate it if u can answer me more reasonably so that a healthy mind can accept your arguments as valid.
please my dear beloved, i would appreciate it if u take ur time in studying my questions, and answer them in a more reasonable way than that u have already tried.
kazzazi 3 years ago
"The keys of the kingdom of heaven" are the words of Christ. All the words of Holy Scripture are His, and are here included. These words have power to open and to shut heaven.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
but thats not what the scripture from matthew is saying litterally. litterally this scripture from matthew is saying that Christ is telling peter what you(peter) binde on earth shall be bound in heaven .... see? didnt i tell u earlier protestants litteralize what suites them, and symbolize what does not suite them? ur just proving this. this passage does not suite u in its litteral sense, thus ur interoducing a method to interpret it to through away its tru meaning.
kazzazi 3 years ago
Peter himself, writing by inspiration, applies this prophecy to Jesus. He says, "If ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious: unto whom coming, a living stone, rejected indeed of men, but with God elect, precious, ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house." 1 Peter 2:3-5, R. V.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
please explain 1 Peter 2:3-5
if Peter is the Rock why did He say that Christ is the Rock?
lazbo4174 3 years ago
"Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." 1 Cor. 3:11. "Upon this rock," said Jesus, "I will build My church." In the presence of God, and all the heavenly intelligences, in the presence of the unseen army of hell, Christ founded His church upon the living Rock. That Rock is Himself,His own body, for us broken and bruised. Against the church built upon this foundation, the gates of hell shall not prevail.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
yes ok, this protestant interpretation of this scriptural passage is old, i've heard of it. it is as old as the reformation 16th century interpretation. if u really believe that this interpretation is older, then be kind please, and provide me with a document earlier than the 16th century showing that this interpretation is earlier than the 16th century.
kazzazi 3 years ago
it is not a "protestant interpretation" it is the obvious interpretation based upon many texts throughout the Old and Knew testaments, which certainly do pre-date the 16th century. Do you genuinly not accept Christ as the Rock of the Church?
lazbo4174 3 years ago
if ur not able to support ur interpretation of this scripture with an official document that traces back further than the 16th century, let me know so i can support my interpretation of this passage with documents from the early fathers of the church that trace back to the 4th, 3th, 2nd centuries. by the way u have to abide to your word that the church fathers were honest men and upstanding.
kazzazi 3 years ago
i do believe that those men were honest and upstanding, i did not say that i agreed with all they wrote nor did i suggest that they correctly interpreted the Scripture. It is possible to be honest and upstanding and at the same time wrong.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
Scripture supports the interpretation i adhere to, i do not need it to be ratified by the early church fathers
lazbo4174 3 years ago
i believe that you rely too heavily on what the church fathers had to say on the Scripture, did they even agree with each other?
do you always study the Word as their writings dictate or do you truly apply the counsel given in ISAIAH 28:10?
lazbo4174 3 years ago
earlier today you asked me to provide evidence from a catechism of the popes claims to be God. i am waiting for you to respond to the reply i gave you
lazbo4174 3 years ago
i am going to my bed now it is late, no doubt i will find more comments from you tomorrow. Please consider some of the things i have asked and said as i consider that which you have asked and said
goodnight
lazbo4174 3 years ago
by the way lazbo, as far as i got to know about u, is that ur name is mark and u live in the united kingdome. my name is muhannad kazzazi and i live all the way in canada. umm, yes for sure i will study carefully the points u expressed, and i'll look for answers for them. but one thing i wonna say, if whatsoever i keep quoting and u keep quoting and we never agree, i would like to keep hatred outside.
im gonna go to sleep as well
and goodnight to u too my friend.
kazzazi 3 years ago
my friend i can assure you that no hatred will develop during the dialogue we share i respect you and your opinions. As stated in my last comment... i will consider that which you have asked and said.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
umm sorry just another thing i wanted to say. u just mentioned to me that u asked a couple of questions that i have not answered yet, yes ur right, and as i said earlier, i will look into your questions, study them, and come back to u. But also, if u check our dialogue from the begining there are many questions that i asked that remained unanswered. so i suggest now that u treat me as u want me to treat u, and if u like just take your time to study all my questions.
kazzazi 3 years ago
nothing new established in this meeting, just the settling of a dispute between converted Jews and converted Gentiles about the validity of circumcision.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
show me one scriptural referrence from any one of the 4 Gospels, that Jesus Christ in the 3 years of his ministry teaching his desciples that "circumsion is not nassessary for salvation" and ill accept the validity of ur argument. go..
kazzazi 3 years ago
do you not know what circumscision symbolized?
lazbo4174 3 years ago
by the way, i asked u for a logical and a reasonable answer about the 35000 different truths lool that equally exist in status today. is that your best logical and reasonable answere u were able to come up with?? i thought u were more reasonable than this. do u not realize that each one of the 35000 different denominations has equally memorized the bible, and concluded that his truth is the truth lool ??
kazzazi 3 years ago
and u still didnt answer me logically and reasonably about the more than 1000 years of church heading to corruption, and about themore than 30 generations of humanity that was bron and died during that time interval. what was God doing in your openion seeing all these people perishing out of no fault of their own???
kazzazi 3 years ago
just because u wanted to compare isreal to the church. do u know the time interval between moses (founder of that nation) and Christ?? it is historically estimated to be 1250 years between moses and Christ. which is 'approximately' equal to the time interval between 4th century christianity, and the time of reformation 16th century.
kazzazi 3 years ago
now my question is this: do u think during that time interval in isreal(moses to christ) God left generations and generations of humanity perish without devine intervention? obviously not, since that would be contrary to the canon of the old testument, when in that time interval God sent many prophets to lead and guide his people "properly". scripture is "full" of powerfull wintnesses about that, just open the old testument and go through the prophets.
kazzazi 3 years ago
now since God did not leave generations and generations of humanity to predition in that time interval of isreal. im gonna keep on emphisizing on my original point, where was God or what was he doing seeing these many generations of humanity perish between the 4th and the 16th centuries, when the first "protestant reformation" appeared for the first time in the historical record of the church ???
kazzazi 3 years ago
one more thing that protestants always always always fail to realize. the reformation that took place in the church of the old testument ie. isreal was done by infalable men. how do i know that, easy read the bible and it will tell u that those who did the reforms were "prophets". now im pretty sure u will feel frustrated about the word infalable because its usually used by catholics to refer to the office of the pope. but i'd like to explain to u what that word means.
kazzazi 3 years ago
this word does not mean "without a sin", sin has nothing to do with the meaning of this word. it simply means that these men were devinely inspired. when God inspires men to preach and reform, im pretty sure u believe that he is able to keep his revelation that comes to people (through these men) free of human error. as a result, what they preach to their audience should be accepted as authoritative and infalible.
kazzazi 3 years ago
by the way, im still waiting for you to provide me with a scriptural evidence in which Christ gives his decisples a canon of scripture, in which he tells them "here this is a canon of scriptures, take it as your authority and guidelines to live according to"....
kazzazi 3 years ago
however, according fundamentalist reformers lol, the bread and wine are devine sacraments. because according to them this is mentioned in scripture very clearly, and as a matter of fact, evangelicals cannot be saved because they have disobeyed this scriptural passage ".....truly truly, i say to u unless u eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood, u have no life in u....." read from john 6:35 all the way to 6:71.
kazzazi 3 years ago
now the thing that i wonna point out to u clearly is the following: evangelical and fundamentalist protestants are 2 common examples out of the 35000 protestant denominations (including u guys), which equally exist today (not nassesarily in number, but in status), and each equally believes that they have maintained the truth in them, though they disagree on fundamental things regarding salvation.
kazzazi 3 years ago
also in several biblical passages Christ did promise this church "gathering of men" that he will be with them til the consumption of age!!! and we know for fact, that this promise was not only given to that early gathering only, since he said "til the consumption of age", therefore the promise was to them and to the continuity of that church that he himself founded.
kazzazi 3 years ago
just for your information, over the course of the 1st 4 centuries of the church, more than 80 gospels existed, and they still exist today in the musiums and elsewhere. it is these fathers of the church that im talking about that acknowledged the ligitimacy of the 4 gospels that are canonized today in the new testument out of the more than 80 that existed as authoritative. and by the "universal/catholic/ecumenical" counsils starting in the 4th century they put the canon of scripture
kazzazi 3 years ago
hello again my friend, i have heard of other gospels, i believe that God inspired men to compile the books that make the whole Bible as we have it today. i do believe that God established a body of men (the church), i believe He also gave us prophecies revealing that the church would fall away from the Truth (2 Thessalonians 2, Revelation 6). I have been to Catholic churches and do not feel comfortable with what i have experienced.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
hello, im glad u mentioned (2 thessalonians 2, and revelation 6) as your scriptural evidence about "the church" heading to corruption. first i would like to deal with 2 thessalonians 2. we both agree that a deciever will arise sometime and teaches false doctrines, and proclaim himself to be God. but what i disagree with u on is that this deciever would be the bishop of rome ie. the pope for the following reasons :
kazzazi 3 years ago
reason number 1) is common sense. paul did not only wirte a letter to the thessalonians, he wrote several letters among which a letter to the church of the "romans". as a matter of fact, if however that prophecy of paul was referring to the bishop of rome ie. the pope later on, then it would have made a lot more sense that this scriptural passage would be found in the letter to the "romans" instead of the letter to the thessalonians.
kazzazi 3 years ago
reason number 2) is historical. as for the bishop of rome ie. the pope, provide me with one referrence from the catechism of the catholic church (since it is in the catechism where you find what the catholic church trully teaches about what it believes) stating that the "pope is God and should be worshiped" or something like "the pope has a devine nature which makes him = to God". if u cannot provide such an evidence, then based on what did u protestants conclude that this figure is the pope??
kazzazi 3 years ago
"The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth...by divine right the Pope has supreme and full power in faith, in morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true vicar, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils...
lazbo4174 3 years ago
here we go again, you are confusion papal authority with divinity. first of all, vicor of someone does not mean that this person carries the same nature of that someone, in which if Christ is devine, then the pope must also be devine Noo. it simply means a representative or spokesman. and ill show u several scriptural passage clearly showing that peter was given this position from Christ himself.
kazzazi 3 years ago
cont... the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth."
Quoted in the New York Catechism.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
by the way, the fact the catechsim of the catholic church instruct us that the pope is the head of the universal church, and is infalible under conditions, which is fully scriptural. however u still did not show me where catholics believe that the pope is God, and that we should worship him....
kazzazi 3 years ago
reason # 3) is that the false doctrines being taught by the catholic church in your openion ie. indulgences, the rosary, infant baptism. ill wait for your answers to what i asked from u earlier ie. reason #1 and reason#2, then we'll go through these doctrines one by one as slow as u wish.
kazzazi 3 years ago
now here the question comes, just because the prophet moses was a sinner, i know that he was a sinner from holy scripture because scripture tells me that he killed an ejyptian. do u not believe that regardless of his sinful nature the revelation that God gave him was infalible? just answer me and we'll carry on our open dialogue here before all witnesses, since u were affraid to give out your # and email when i asked u for them earlier.
kazzazi 3 years ago
my friend you are sadly beginning to make assumptions, i am not afraid of giving my email or phone number to anyone, i felt that discussion in this public forum would be adequate for now. Yes Moses killed an Egyptian and yes "All have sinned" (Rom 3:23) but if a person does not repent, and Moses did repent, the Most High cannot speak through them. Moses accepted the Law and by faith kept it therefore he was used by God to speak on His behalf.
lazbo4174 3 years ago
u have made another biblcal mistake here "if persona does not repent, the most high does not speak through them. " a careful reading of scripture shows that moses disobeyed God again during the time God was using him to bring to his people the revelation. when moses came down from the mount and found the people corrupted, God told him to break the tablets only once and he broke them twice. God had a reason to tell him to break it once, but moses disobeyed God.
kazzazi 3 years ago
every time a person sins repentance is neccessary
lazbo4174 3 years ago
repentance is neccessary from sin in order not to go to hell as the bible clearly teaches. however, this was not the argument between u and i. the true agrument was "show me a scriptural passage saying that moses repeted from his murdered in order for God to use him to speak through him to his people". and i didnt see any reply on that yet.
kazzazi 3 years ago
"and Moses did repent, the Most High cannot speak through them." u said moses did repent from murder so that God could speek through him. exodus 2:12 is when moses killed the egyptian, read it 'all the way' to 3:12 when God called him and instucted him on what to do. just show me one word in scripture that says moses "repented" from the murder he committed in order that God can used him.
kazzazi 3 years ago
notice, that im only using bible so far, i have not stepped out of the boundaries of holy scripture. and from only bible ill provide solid proofs that the doctrines of your church are wrong one after the other
kazzazi 3 years ago
it seems as though you have gone on the attack, apologies if i am mistaken. I am willing to answer any of your questions about the doctrines of my church and look forward to furher dialogue
lazbo4174 3 years ago
ok now u apparently agreed that though moses was a sinner his revelation was infalible. tell me whether u agree on this or not first so we can go further on from here
kazzazi 3 years ago