It’s not biblical!

[miamited]

Hi Free

My only point was that Protestants have more in common with Catholics than with either JWs or Mormons.

That may be true. I don't really know. I've never actually sat down and tried to tally up the issues and count them up to be rated as 'most' wrong or 'less' wrong.

I do know that the JW's certainly have some beliefs that are different than many christians. However, the JW's do believe strongly that our eternal existence is going to be right here on the earth, although it will have been made new. A lot of the people in my Baptist fellowship think they're going to spend eternity with God in heaven somewhere. Like I say, wrong is wrong. Now, sure, I can say, well, that's not as bad as believing that you can destroy a perfectly valid marriage because you think God's given you the authority to bind or loose His word. God hates divorce!!!! And you can call it an annulment all you want to try to convince yourself that it isn't what God is referring to in the Scriptures about marriage and divorce...but it's divorce.

Yes, I do know, from actual experience of visiting a couple of their meetings, that they give very little respect for the Scriptures that Israel gave to us. Their 'Scriptures' are more what Joseph Smith has written for them. BTW I have also visited JW fellowships. So, I do have some experience in both of them, although not particularly deep.

God bless,
Ted

 

[miamited]

How do we know for sure what is and what is not scripture
Scripture the so called sole authority does not say?

Hi donadams

Well, as far as the old covenant, that was all canonized by the Jews before Jesus ever got here. Those would be the Scriptures that Jesus would have been referring to on the many occasions where he got spoke to correct the Jewish leaders of his day. The new covenant was formally canonized in the third century A.D. Although, practically, it had already been pretty much established by the early fellowships in what they would accept to pass around to the people. But in the 3rd century, a group established by the CC, did start to sort through the letters and establish a canon so that people wouldn't be able to sneak in any erroneous writings or somehow unapproved.

The Roman CC then took the Scriptures and pretty much locked them away from the hands of the common man and made the claim that the common man wouldn't be able to understand them. That's one of the issues that began to be a sticking point. Detractors began to teach that the Holy Spirit that indwells the born again believer has the sufficient power and resources to give any man, with his presence, understanding of the things of God.

Then the RCC began a centuries long process of intimidation, persecution and outright murder, of everyone that they held to be heretics. Many of them were true saints. I'm pretty confident that it is this very pogrom of the RCC that is referred to in the Revelation of the woman on the beast being drunk with the blood of the saints. Now, the Jews did it a lot also, as Jesus said about them, that they killed the prophets. But since Jesus visitation to us and throughout the time span that the Revelation of Jesus seems to cover, until the day of judgment, it is so far the RCC that has murdered more saints than any other body of people on the earth.

However, I am fully understanding that today's Catholic doesn't want to believe that. And it's ok. It was something that happened over 500 years ago and it's done. But I believe it is what the mention in the Revelation of Jesus is talking about. It then goes on to describe that the beast is wearing scarlet and purple. Those are actually the official colors of the Catholic organization. If someone were to give me a sign that says, "Your looking for group that identifies with the colors of scarlet and purple, I don't think there is any organization in the world that one could consider but the RCC.

Now, maybe as we go through time some other group will come up and it will be another 1,000 years until Jesus returns and this new group is all over scarlet and purple. Then I'll see about changing my mind. But for today and the past that has gone by so far. There is no other earthly organization on the face of the earth, as far as I know, that is identified somehow with scarlet and purple that it would have made sense for God to have warned us in this manner in His word.

"The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet robes, and she wore jewelry made of gold, precious stones, and pearls. In her hand she held a gold cup filled with the filthy and nasty things she had done."

I suppose it might be worth mentioning that worldwide, the RCC holds more gold, precious stones and pearls, than pretty much any other single entity upon the earth.

"The Roman Catholic Church controls approximately 60,350 tons of gold, twice the size of official gold reserves worldwide. The Vatican's treasure of solid gold has been estimated by the United Nations World Magazine to amount to several billion dollars. She has art works and precious metal jewelry pieces that have created the largest single reservoir in the world. There literally is not another single entity on the face of the earth that has the gold, precious stones, pearls that the RCC holds.

The seven heads that the woman is sitting on stand for seven hills.

There is literally again, no other area of the earth that is known as the city on seven hills, than Rome.

So, it may not be the RCC if some other organization should raise it's ugly head, and that may well happen. But as the description stands in the Scriptures, and taking it and trying to make it fit some group on the earth, so far it's the RCC.

So yes, there was a part of the RCC that worked on establishing the canon of new covenant Scripture. However, they can't even take their own direction on that. Today the RCC doesn't even honor it's own original canon. Now you will find in most 'Catholic' bibles several extrabiblical readings that they have incorporated.

So, I understand that those involved with it aren't going to accept it.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Why is there still a “ministry of reconciliation”? 2 cor 5:18

Because there are still people that need to be reconciled to God. But that hardly means sacrificing Christ again and again to reconcile them to God. That does not need to happen. All they need to do is make their appeal to the one time for all time sacrifice of Christ that he made 2000 years ago.

 

[jaybo]

There are two quotations in 1 Tim 5:18:

1Ti 5:18 For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.”

Yes, the first is a quote from Deut 25:4, but the second is from Luke 10:7:

Luk 10:7 And remain in the same house, eating and drinking what they provide, for the laborer deserves his wages. Do not go from house to house. (ESV)

"Laborer" and "wages" don't even appear together in the OT. In fact, "laborer" is used only once, in Ecc 5:12.

Luke wrote what Jesus said and Paul quoted it, calling it Scripture. And "Scripture" most certainly applies to the second quote in 1 Tim 5:18, unless we first make "and" cease to mean anything. It is also supported by:

1Co 9:14 In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel. (ESV)


Three words would be better--"the other Scriptures." That the idea occurs nowhere else in the Bible is irrelevant as to whether or not it occurs here.


How do you think it should be interpreted?

"Scriptures" in this case means "writings". Peter, a believing Jew, would never claim that Paul was adding to the sacred Jewish writings. That would be the ultimate heresy.

Luke 24:32 is an example of this: "They said to each other, “Didn’t our hearts burn within us while he was speaking with us on the road, while he was explaining the scriptures to us?” Scriptures means the Jewish Bible.

 

[Hopeful]

The NIV.

Born abnormally, not of normal vaginal birth, but ripped from the womb in an untimely matter.

Oh brother...
"Out of due time" simply means... too late to be an original apostle who got to walk with, and witness, Christ on earth.

 

[miamited]

Hi wondering

I'm sorry you hate a particular denomination because of some idiot girl..

Now, why in the world would you say that? Please understand that my feelings towards the teachings and practices of the RCC have been confirmed long before I ever knew you existed. So don't think so highly of yourself that you have caused me to 'hate', which I've insisted is not the right word, the RCC. I just know that the RCC teaches and practices false doctrine. But I don't 'hate' anybody because of it. I know that they are deceived and, while you don't agree, that deception isn't a whole lot different than the deception that those groups you are claiming are believing. It's all the same. False doctrine. False teaching.

You likely won't agree, but I'm fairly confident, at least as things in the world stand right now, that the description of the 'woman riding the Beast' is describing the Catholic organization. We will one day see how God destroys her for shedding the blood of His saints. That's my firm conviction and understanding of the subject. But I fully understand that you won't agree.

Honestly, I'm curious as to why you keep trying to use the word 'hate' to describe those who don't agree with you? You seem to be taking all of this that I'm saying personally, instead of letting it rest upon the foundation of the RCC where it belongs.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Free]

Hi Free

That may be true. I don't really know. I've never actually sat down and tried to tally up the issues and count them up to be rated as 'most' wrong or 'less' wrong.

I do know that the JW's certainly have some beliefs that are different than many christians.

JWs and Mormons both have beliefs different from all Christians. I used to study Mormonism and JW beliefs quite deeply, having also discussed these things with them many times in my home and friends’ homes. Both believe they are the only true Christian denomination, not realizing that neither of them are, because both have beliefs that contradict and deny core Christian beliefs.

JWs deny the Trinity, the deity of Jesus (claiming that he was the archangel Michael before he left and heaven and after he returned), the literal physical resurrection of Jesus (raised a spirit body), the person of the Holy Spirit, salvation by grace, and believe that only 144,000 anointed JWs go to heaven while the rest of the JWs remain in a paradise on earth. They have their own translation of the Bible which erroneously supports some of their beliefs by inserting words that aren't in any Greek text.

Mormonism teaches polytheism, that Jesus is the first spirit-child (of many) from sexual intimacy between the Father and one of his wives, that Jesus and Satan are spirit-brothers, the restoration of the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods, salvation by works, that the BoM is another testament of Christ, that God the Father has a humanlike body, and men and their wives can become gods of their own planets (having their own spirit-children, continuing the eternal process).

However, the JW's do believe strongly that our eternal existence is going to be right here on the earth, although it will have been made new.

Which isn’t a core belief; one can have that belief and still not be a Christian.

A lot of the people in my Baptist fellowship think they're going to spend eternity with God in heaven somewhere. Like I say, wrong is wrong.

And a lot of people in your Baptist fellowship are simply wrong.

Now, sure, I can say, well, that's not as bad as believing that you can destroy a perfectly valid marriage because you think God's given you the authority to bind or loose His word. God hates divorce!!!! And you can call it an annulment all you want to try to convince yourself that it isn't what God is referring to in the Scriptures about marriage and divorce...but it's divorce.

Yes, God hates divorce but it happens even among Christians. The issue is that Mormons and JWs aren’t even Christians to begin with.

 

[Free]

"Scriptures" in this case means "writings". Peter, a believing Jew, would never claim that Paul was adding to the sacred Jewish writings. That would be the ultimate heresy.

That's begging the question. "Scriptures" in this case means exactly that, "Scriptures." The Greek word is graphe, and appears 51 times in the NT--31 times it is translated as "Scripture" and 20 times as "Scriptures." In other words, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that Paul was simply claiming that Paul's letters were mere "writings," especially since he says "the other Scriptures." That is, the same as the other specific Scriptures.

Luke 24:32 is an example of this: "They said to each other, “Didn’t our hearts burn within us while he was speaking with us on the road, while he was explaining the scriptures to us?” Scriptures means the Jewish Bible.

Exactly. And Peter was putting Paul's letters on par with the Jewish Bible. There is no other meaning to be derived from what Peter says.

 

[miamited]

Hi Free,

JWs and Mormons both have beliefs different from all Christians.

That's right. Some of the doctrines, practices and beliefs of the JW's and Mormons is different than many or most believers of other denominations. However, I mean if you've been following along here, there are a lot of believers who think the same thing about the RCC. Me, I don't believe the Scriptures tells us that God is ok with anyone claiming to represent Him, allowing for breaking up families and marriage. Do the JW's approve of some form of 'divorce' for their congregants? Well, who's really the bad guy if God says that He hates divorce and His understanding that the RCC allowing it is a divorce. Yes, I know you guys don't call it divorce, but you've just picked some other word to say the same thing and find justification in just the change of a name. I believe that when God sees a married couple not living together and sharing their lives together as they should be doing, whether we want to call it a divorce or not, is a broken marriage in God's sight. God's claim is, without any other qualifiers as to 'why' or 'how' a broken marriage might come about...He hates divorce.

Perhaps we need a good study on the term. Here's what one Jewish site says about the actual word that is translated as 'divorce' for us: Divorce, Jewish (כּריתוּת, kerithuth', a cutting apart, Jer 3:8; ἀποστάσιον, desertion or separation; both usually rendered "divorcement;" the verb is גָּרִשׁ, garash', to expel, Le 21:14; Le 22:13; Nu 30:9; ἀπολύω, to dissolve or dismiss, Mt 5:32), or repudiation.

Look, it seems that as far as the Jewish community understands the word, what the RCC is doing is divorcing married people. So, the RCC, as I understand it, directly goes against the word and will of God in this matter of marriage.

Sure the Mormons believe that there was some guy that found a bunch of gold tablets, supposedly left by Jesus when he lived in North America. Wrong! But the RCC teaches you that there are ways that you can actually save the dead.

Finally, I look at the massive, massive wealth of the RCC, and I don't know how familiar you are with the finances of the RCC, but they are the wealthiest 'organization' on the planet. They fill their worship centers with all kinds of statuary. They believe that there is some allowance given in the Scriptures that we can pray to a saint. That isn't Scriptural. Only the trinity hears our prayers. Saints, even if they are in heaven, are just people like you and I. I can't find any Scriptural reference that they somehow gain some special power that they can hear our prayers, too. Maybe when we pray it comes out in heaven over some loudspeaker and everyone hears all of our prayers...Naaaaah!

So, I get it that you think that these other faith practices that you mention sure have some pretty egregious errors, but I think you should be just as careful in the practices of your own group, as far as whether some of the things that they do is really honoring to God.

Now, if I'm correct, and I understand that's still debatable, then there is no way that the Pope, running this faith organization filled with so much wrong theology, it God's representative on the earth. I'm pretty sure that God wouldn't let His representative on the earth be a party to so much ignorance of His ways.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Oh brother...
"Out of due time" simply means... too late to be an original apostle who got to walk with, and witness, Christ on earth.

Friend, do a word study on it. It's making a reference to a violent, untimely 'birth' as in an abortion, not an overdue or late pregnancy and birth as you are suggesting.

G1626 - ektrōma - Strong's Greek Lexicon (kjv)

G1626 - ἔκτρωμα éktrōma, ek'-tro-mah; from a comparative of and τιτρώσκω titrṓskō (to wound); a miscarriage (abortion), i.e. (by analogy) untimely birth:—born out of due time.

www.blueletterbible.org

 

[Free]

Hi Free,

That's right. Some of the doctrines, practices and beliefs of the JW's and Mormons is different than many or most believers of other denominations. However, I mean if you've been following along here, there are a lot of believers who think the same thing about the RCC. Me, I don't believe the Scriptures tells us that God is ok with anyone claiming to represent Him, allowing for breaking up families and marriage. Do the JW's approve of some form of 'divorce' for their congregants? Well, who's really the bad guy if God says that He hates divorce and His understanding that the RCC allowing it is a divorce. Yes, I know you guys don't call it divorce, but you've just picked some other word to say the same thing and find justification in just the change of a name. I believe that when God sees a married couple not living together and sharing their lives together as they should be doing, whether we want to call it a divorce or not, is a broken marriage in God's sight. God's claim is, without any other qualifiers as to 'why' or 'how' a broken marriage might come about...He hates divorce.

Perhaps we need a good study on the term. Here's what one Jewish site says about the actual word that is translated as 'divorce' for us: Divorce, Jewish (כּריתוּת, kerithuth', a cutting apart, Jer 3:8; ἀποστάσιον, desertion or separation; both usually rendered "divorcement;" the verb is גָּרִשׁ, garash', to expel, Le 21:14; Le 22:13; Nu 30:9; ἀπολύω, to dissolve or dismiss, Mt 5:32), or repudiation.

Look, it seems that as far as the Jewish community understands the word, what the RCC is doing is divorcing married people. So, the RCC, as I understand it, directly goes against the word and will of God in this matter of marriage.

Sure the Mormons believe that there was some guy that found a bunch of gold tablets, supposedly left by Jesus when he lived in North America. Wrong! But the RCC teaches you that there are ways that you can actually save the dead.

You keep making it sound like Mormonism isn't so bad and that the RCC is the worst, and that based largely on divorce. Yet, as I pointed out, divorce and remarriage is everywhere in Christian denominations, not just the RCC. So, there really is no point in arguing to it as though it shows how terrible the RCC is. It is just one thing among many that shows how bad the state of the Church is.

It is also worth mentioning that Mormons baptize on behalf of the dead so those who are dead can accept Mormonism.

So, I get it that you think that these other faith practices that you mention sure have some pretty egregious errors, but I think you should be just as careful in the practices of your own group, as far as whether some of the things that they do is really honoring to God.

Again, my only point was that JW and Mormonism aren't Christian, at all, as they deny core Christian doctrine. That is far beyond "some pretty egregious errors." They aren't even in the ballpark. And that is not merely what I think; it has been widely known for a long time by those who have studied their beliefs. Also, as I mentioned, both JWs and Mormons believe they alone are the true Church and that we are not Christians. The RCC, on the other hand, while it has added things, holds to most of the core Christian doctrine, if not all, depending on what parish one is in.

 

[miamited]

Hi Free

You keep making it sound like Mormonism isn't so bad and that the RCC is the worst,

Look, that's how you may be reading my words, but that is not at all what I've said. All I'm saying is that wrong worship and wrong faith is wrong worship and wrong faith whether it falls under the umbrella of the teaching of Mormon, or teaching of Jehovah's witnesses or teachings of the Catholic organization. I believe that in God's sight it's all the same.

If you read the Scriptures from beginning to end carefully, you're going to find that man always messes up the things of God. If you read the letters Jesus gave to the churches 2,000 years ago, you're going to read that Jesus didn't have much good to say about any of them. Yes, there was one or two, but even with those he warned of some possible error. Here, look at his words to the church at Ephesus:
I know your deeds, your labor, and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate those who are evil, and you have tested and exposed as liars those who falsely claim to be apostles. Without growing weary, you have persevered and endured many things for the sake of My name. But I have this against you: You have abandoned your first love.

Yes, Jesus has some high praise for the church in Ephesus. Their labor and perseverance seem to be righteous in his sight. They don't tolerate evil and they have tested and exposed liars who claim to be Apostles. Yet Jesus tells them, "Look, even with all your righteous works, I still hold against you that you have abandoned your first love. So, I would just caution you to take the warnings of those letters to heart and understand that God has never given any man to be His representative on the earth, apart from Jesus, the Christ.

Yes, I have said that, as I understand it, in 'God's sight', they are equal to Him. But where you have gleaned this idea that I'm trying to make it sound like Mormonism isn't so bad, well that's you reading your own bias into what I'm saying.

God bless,
Ted

 

[JackrabbitSlim]

.So don't think so highly of yourself that you have caused me to 'hate', which I've insisted is not the right word, the RCC.

There is nothing wrong in hating Catholicism, the doctrines of JW, Mormonism, etc. These all doctrines of demons.

 

[miamited]

There is nothing wrong in hating Catholicism, the doctrines of JW, Mormonism, etc. These all test doctrines of demons.

Hi JackrabbitSlim

While I try not to be quite so condemning, I believe that you are correct in this. The demon world that lives all around us is always working to thwart the work of God. What greater battle could they pitch, then to get God's people to believe a lot of 'untruths' about Him and His purposes. It's exactly what Satan did to Eve that started this whole battle of sin/evil. Do you honestly believe that Satan doesn't see what all his 'lying doctrine' did to Eve and how successful that was, that he isn't still using that tactic? We also find in the Revelation that we are warned that Satan, after Jesus ascended to the Father, began his work of going about and trying to destroy those 'who hold to the testimony of Jesus'.
Listen, God's word also warns us that Satan is more sly and cunning, than any man. So trust me, that means he can bend the will of the lost and the weak in God, by putting all kinds of stumbling blocks in our way.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Free]

But where you have gleaned this idea that I'm trying to make it sound like Mormonism isn't so bad, well that's you reading your own bias into what I'm saying.

No, that is me reading what you're saying and what you're not saying. You have given long rants against the RCC, but when it has come to Mormonism, have said relatively little and downplay what they believe, saying such hings such as, "Sure the Mormons believe that there was some guy that found a bunch of gold tablets, supposedly left by Jesus when he lived in North America."

I just found it interesting that you do this when JWs and Mormons reject most, or all, core Christian beliefs that the RCC accepts. That's all.

 

[GodsGrace]

Hi wondering


Now, why in the world would you say that? Please understand that my feelings towards the teachings and practices of the RCC have been confirmed long before I ever knew you existed. So don't think so highly of yourself that you have caused me to 'hate', which I've insisted is not the right word, the RCC. I just know that the RCC teaches and practices false doctrine. But I don't 'hate' anybody because of it. I know that they are deceived and, while you don't agree, that deception isn't a whole lot different than the deception that those groups you are claiming are believing. It's all the same. False doctrine. False teaching.

You likely won't agree, but I'm fairly confident, at least as things in the world stand right now, that the description of the 'woman riding the Beast' is describing the Catholic organization. We will one day see how God destroys her for shedding the blood of His saints. That's my firm conviction and understanding of the subject. But I fully understand that you won't agree.

Honestly, I'm curious as to why you keep trying to use the word 'hate' to describe those who don't agree with you? You seem to be taking all of this that I'm saying personally, instead of letting it rest upon the foundation of the RCC where it belongs.

God bless,
Ted

Just state what the false doctrines are and we'll go through them...
Something I've done many times.

Christianity is being attacked all over the world.
I think we should be more united, at least in tolerance.

 

[JackrabbitSlim]

Colossians 2:8 (NASB95): See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

 

[miamited]

Just state what the false doctrines are and we'll go through them...
Something I've done many times.

Christianity is being attacked all over the world.
I think we should be more united, at least in tolerance.

Hi wondering

Listen, I'm not stupid! I understand that the Catholic organization has given their people all of their explanation as to how these practices and doctrines are somehow inferred from several places of the Scriptures.

But I'm willing to play. What gives the Catholic Church the authority to destroy marriages? Which is what the practice of annulment does. I'm telling you, my father was married to my mother for 25 good years and our family consisted of 4 children. Where do you find that God's word says that the RCC has the authority to have destroyed that marriage?

God bless,
Ted

 

[GodsGrace]

There is nothing wrong in hating Catholicism, the doctrines of JW, Mormonism, etc. These all doctrines of demons.

There is no room for hate in the Kingdom of God.
IF you're a member of the Kingdom, Jesus said you are to
LOVE GOD
LOVE YOURSELF
LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR

The neighbor could even by atheist or Catholic, you're still to love them.
The man left for dead by thieves on his way to Jericho was saved by a Samaritan...
much hated by the Jews.

If you're ever hungry one day, you'll find food at your local Catholic church,
and clothing and other necessities for families.

BTW, calling any denomination demonic is against the TOS.
Please be civil.
1.4: Do not misquote or misrepresent another member. Do not state a negative opinion about a member's denomination, leaders, founders, or the veracity of a member's faith. (Exodus 20:16)

 

[miamited]

Hi wondering

Christianity is being attacked all over the world.
I think we should be more united, at least in tolerance.

Yes it has. And it has been such since the early days of the faith, largely by the Roman Empire in those days. But this issue of tolerance is a difficult issue. Paul wrote of a man in the fellowship who was having relations with Father's wife. Saying that he should be put out of fellowship. Shouldn't he have been more tolerant?

I'm pretty sure that God doesn't expect us to be tolerant of sin, especially among His people. Now, we can allow the world to do whatever they want. We can be just as tolerant as any one of us cares to be about what the lost world does. After all, Paul also wrote about that. He said that we should not tolerate sin among the fellowship.

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”

Paul seems to say that we are to pretty much let the world go in the way that it will go and God will one day judge them. But for those who proclaim to be a part of us, and are somehow working evil, then we should 'expel the wicked person from among you. So honestly, I don't see that Paul does ask us to or expect us to go out and judge the wickedness of the lost world. He seems to be saying, "Hey! Just leave them alone and let God do as He will do. You preach them the gospel. You love them with the gospel. You conquer their hearts with the gospel. If you are able to convert them, then...THEN the Holy Spirit will come to them and guide them out of their sinful ways.

That's honestly one of the problems with the modern practice of Christianity. We have turned it into a cudgel to beat the sinners with. Not some instrument of love to attract them.

God bless,
Ted