THE INQUISITION: A Study in Absolute Catholic Power

[francisdesales]

One does not open oneself up to the lies of the father of lies, but instead holds fast to the truth of God's Word;

We are just going in circles. Obviously, you feel your version of interpretation is God's unadultered truth. In other words, you call yourself the infallible dispenser of truth. This incessant proclamation that you are the valid interpreter of Sacred Scripture is getting old - and has been unproven so far.

From what I have seen here regarding your fruit, I will have to respectfully decline to accept your version of the truth. I am not moved by the Spirit of God to accept your version, which will naturally lead to your attitude towards others. One's doctrines will help determine one's attitudes towards others. Frankly, I've been there and do not desire to return to the "old man".

Peace

 

[Solo]

I may be missing something but he doesn't say you are condemned there. He says "unless you are born again, you cannot see the kingdom of God." It is notable that he does NOT say "you will never see the kingdom of God." Over the years I have come to realize that "you will burn in hell if you aren't born again" is not really what Jesus teaches. We Protestants make up stuff too I think, or are prone to accept the teachngs of our church too readily.

I don't deny false teaching can lead to people dying without being born again. I simply question whether Jesus is saying "all misled people are lost- tough luck." I think ignorance may be an excuse, and I think the cross means God can justly save anyone who is willing. That is the wonder of the cross and of imputed righteousness. It frees God to save one and all should he so choose, whether they have jumped through all the hoops our theology requires or not. 'Tis a dangerous thing to assert what God will and will not do.

I now lean towards Lewis' (admittedly unusual but not unscriptural) belief that people go to hell because they really hate heaven more than they hate hell. They can't or won't serve God even after they know the truth. Those who can possibly be redeemed will be, once they hear the whole truth and repent.

Rad

Jesus said,

• "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." John 3:17-21

PS I am not a protestant. I have never been affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church, and though I am against the false teaching that they propagate, I do not belong to a protestant church. I am a member of the true body of Jesus Christ, and I worship in an assembly of believers that has Apostolic links that bypass the Church of Rome.

 

[Solo]

One does not open oneself up to the lies of the father of lies, but instead holds fast to the truth of God's Word;

We are just going in circles. Obviously, you feel your version of interpretation is God's unadultered truth. In other words, you call yourself the infallible dispenser of truth. This incessant proclamation that you are the valid interpreter of Sacred Scripture is getting old - and has been unproven so far.

From what I have seen here regarding your fruit, I will have to respectfully decline to accept your version of the truth. I am not moved by the Spirit of God to accept your version, which will naturally lead to your attitude towards others. One's doctrines will help determine one's attitudes towards others. Frankly, I've been there and do not desire to return to the "old man".

Peace

As always you post ad hominem. I have always spoken that believers that have been born again, have the Holy Spirit to lead them into all truth. Your position is that a pope must lead you into all truth, and my position is the the Holy Spirit leads me into all truth. I give the word of God as my authority, you give the Roman Catholic catechism. I'll bet the word of God wins out.

 

[D46]

D46,
I have not seen anything close to hatred in your posts to francisdesales; however, I he also accuses me of hatred. The only thing that I hate is the lies and deceptions of the Roman Catholic institution leading millions upon millions of people to hell with their false teachings.
Michael

There is utterly NO contempt for francis at all. I know he filrmly believes he is right and neither of us fwill ever get anywhere as a result. I keep hoping in vain that he and others would just stop and ask themselves, "What if I'm wrong somewhere about this all?" That will never happen either as they've been 100% brainwashed from childhood (many anyway).

I do, however, detest the teachings of the RCC and their sadistic, murderous background and that's my two biggest "beefs" with them in a nutshell. If we could just stop for a moment and consider that all this bickering back and fourth is all for naught when seen through the span of eternity and that's why I get zealoous about all this. I don't want to see anyone go to a devils hell and if you consider that the time we have here on earth is but a pin head in size compared to the size of the earth when we consider eternity. I can't fathom it and I doubt anyone else can. That's a long time to be wrong and suffer as a result of being hard headed and not to even want to question whether what you believe and do is right or wrong.

There have been more sermons preached, more books written, more videos prepared and websites with historical proof about this organization called Catholicism and I would think it would be suspect in my mind if I were Catholic as to why. No other religion I know of has had so much time devoted to proving it wrong. I would certainly seek the face of God about this (not Mary) to see if these things be true. I've heard it said, "Can 850,000 or a billion people be wrong?" Absolutely. Every pope down through the ages added to the dogma of the church, another blasphemy as good or better than his predecessor...just a for instance...

OF ALL THE HUMAN TRADITIONS taught and practiced by the Roman Catholic Church, which are contrary to the Bible, the most ancient are the prayers for the dead and the sign of the Cross. Both began 300 years after Christ.

The worship of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and the use of the term, "Mother of God", as applied to her, originated in the Council of Ephesus 431 AD

The doctrine of Purgatory was first established by Gregory the Great (591 AD)

The Bible teaches that we pray to God alone. In the primitive church never were prayers directed to Mary, or to dead saints. This practice began in the Roman Church (600 AD)

(Matt. 11:28; Luke 1:46; Acts 10:25-26; 14:14-18)

The kissing of the Pope's feet

It had been a pagan custom to kiss the feet of emperors. The Word of God forbids such practices. (710 AD) (Read Acts 10:25-26; Rev. 19:10; 22:9).

Worship of the cross, images and relics was authorized

This was by order of Dowager Empress Irene of Constantinople, who first caused to pluck the eyes of her own son, Constantine VI, and then called a church council at the request of Hadrian I, pope of Rome at that time. (788 AD)

Such practice is called simply IDOLATRY in the Bible, and is severely condemned. (Read Ex. 20:4; 3:17; Deut. 27:15; Psalm 115).

Canonization of dead saints, first by Pope John XV

Every believer and follower of Christ is called saint in the Bible. (995 AD) (Read Rom. 1:7; I Col. 1:2).

The Mass was developed gradually as a sacrifice; attendance made obligatory in the 11th century.

The Bible teaches that the sacrifice of Christ was offered once and for all, and is not to be repeated, but only commemorated in the Lord's Supper. (Read Heb. 7:27; 9:26-28; 10:10-14).

The Inquisition of heretics was instituted by the Council of Verona in the year 1184. Jesus never taught the use of force to spread His religion

The dogma of Transubstantiation was decreed by Pope Innocent III, in the year 1215.

By this doctrine the priest pretends to perform a daily miracle by changing a wafer into the body of Christ, and then he pretends to eat Him alive in the presence of his people during Mass. The Bible condemns such absurdities; for the Lord's Supper is simply a memorial of the sacrifice of Christ. The spiritual presence of Christ is implied in the Lord's Supper. (Read Luke 22:19-20; John 6:35; I Cor. 11:26).

Confession of sin to the priest at least once a year was instituted by Pope Innocent III., in the Lateran Council. (1215)

The Bible commands us to confess our sins direct to God. (Read Psa. 51:1-10; Luke 7:48; 15:21; I John 1:8-9).

The Scapular was invented by Simon Stock, and English monk. (1287)

It is a piece of brown cloth, with the picture of the Virgin and supposed to contain supernatural virtue to protect from all dangers those who wear it on naked skin. This is fetishism.

The doctrine of Purgatory was proclaimed as a dogma of faith by Council of Florence. (1439)

There is not one word in the Bible that would teach the purgatory of priests. The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sins. (Read I John 1:7-9; 2:1-2; John 5:24; Rom. 8:1).

The Council of Trent, held in the year 1545, declared that Tradition is of equal authority with the Bible

By tradition is meant human teachings. The Pharisees believed the same way, and Jesus bitterly condemned them, for by teaching human tradition, they nullified the commandments of God. (1545) (Read Mark 7:7-13; Col. 2:8; Rev. 22:18).

The Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary was proclaimed by Pope Pius IX (1834)

The Bible states that all men, with the sole exception of Christ, are sinners. Mary herself had need of a Savior. (Read Rom. 3:23; 5:12; Psa. 51:5; Luke 1:30,46,47).

In the year 1930 Pius XI, condemned the Public Schools. In the year 1931 the same pope Pius XI, reaffirmed the doctrine that Mary is "the Mother of God"

This doctrine was first invented by the Council of Ephesus in the year 431. This is a heresy contrary by Mary's own words. (Read Luke 1:46-49; John 2: l-5).

In the year 1950 the last dogma was proclaimed by Pope Pius XII, the Assumption of the Virgin Mary

I find nothing about the teachings of the RCC that coincide with the Word of God and someone who is in this church should start questioning their beliefs and the spirits behind these teachings. It is NOT the Spirit of God.

 

[radorth]

Jesus said,

• "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." John 3:17-21

Fair enough, but I still don't hear Jesus saying "if you aren't born again for whatever reason you are condemned already." Jesus here is definitely NOT saying you have t be born again down here even if you are mistaught, to avoid hell. That's reading too much into it. In fact he says "even those who believe on his name," can be saved. But maybe we agree and are splitting hairs.

PS I am not a protestant. I have never been affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church, and though I am against the false teaching that they propagate, I do not belong to a protestant church. I am a member of the true body of Jesus Christ, and I worship in an assembly of believers that has Apostolic links that bypass the Church of Rome.

I'd like to know more about it, especially if they believe in and seek revival, with a major harvest at the end of the age.

Rad

 

[francisdesales]

As always you post ad hominem.

A bit dramatic, aren't you? I ALWAYS post ad hominem? :roll:

You would have been more accurate if you said "Francisdesales never posts ad hominem arguments". How low are you willing to stoop to try to win an argument?

I have always spoken that believers that have been born again, have the Holy Spirit to lead them into all truth. Your position is that a pope must lead you into all truth, and my position is the the Holy Spirit leads me into all truth.

When have I said that the Pope without the Holy Spirit leads me into truth? Why can't you present a logically sound argument without having to resort to some false dichotomy or misrepresentation or strawman argument or childish name-calling? Can't you come up with any sound arguments or must you always feel it is necessary to make up stuff as you go?

And the Holy Spirit doesn't lead YOU into all truth. Nowhere does the Bible say that "the Holy Spirit leads an individual to all truth". He leads the CHURCH to all Truth. Last I checked, the Church is a community, not you personally.

I give the word of God as my authority, you give the Roman Catholic catechism. I'll bet the word of God wins out.

Your only authority is yourself and your misunderstandings of the Word of God. You are NOT God's spokesman, no matter what you think. People of the Spirit are humble. You lack that trait, sadly. Thus, I'll presume that you are more interested in bludgeoning me with your fallible and mistaken opinions rather than the Word of God. You aren't interested in my soul, just in winning an argument. As a result, I will ignore any such claims from you that you preach the Word of God.

Regards