Questions for Catholics

[The Harvest]

Ex 20:4
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in
heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
Ex 20:5
Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a
jealous God

Why do Catholics ignore God's command not to bow down to statues of Mary and Saints and even Jesus Himself?

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus

Why then is Mary referred to as the mediator?

Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

Why do Catholics call priests father?

Jeremiah 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.

If Mary is the queen of Heaven, who is this verse from the Old Testament referring to?

1 John 1:7
the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Why do Catholics believe that a person's sins are cleansed in purgatory by fire? Is the blood of Jesus not powerful enough for Catholics?

Mark 2:7 who can forgive sins but God only?

Why do priests then claim to be able to forgive sins?

 

[GraceSaves]

Let he who has ears, hear:

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Ex 20:4
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in
heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
Ex 20:5
Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a
jealous God

Why do Catholics ignore God's command not to bow down to statues of Mary and Saints and even Jesus Himself?

This commandment follows and is an extension of having "no other God." Even though Catholics and SOME Protestants number the commandments differently, we both agree that worshipping a statue is having another God, I'm sure.

Thus, unless we are bowing down out of worship, or serving the statue as if it were a god, there is no breaking of the commandment. If so, all bowing would be forbidden. But simple bowing is not forbidden, because a lot of bowing is simple reverance. I am a Catholic; any bowing of the head or otherwise is a bow of reverance, not worship. I am not a fool, and I am not an ignorer of God's law. I do not treat statues as if they were other gods, I do not worship them, and I do not serve them. I understand that they represent heavenly reality, and so my reverance is directed towards those things, of which the statues remind me.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus

Why then is Mary referred to as the mediator?

Mary is not a mediator between God the Father and man, nor does the Church teach so. No one comes to the Father except through the Son. Mary, like any Christian brother or sister, carries our prayers to Jesus, who then takes them to the Father. This does not negate our own ability to take our prayers to Jesus; however, having this ability does not mean it is not good to have others taking our prayers as well.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

Why do Catholics call priests father?

My biological father is a "man..upon the earth." If we are to call no man on earth our father, we have already sinned. Catholics call priests "father" as a symbol of love, because they help guide us to God the Father, just like our biological fathers should (fathers should be the spiritual leader of the household, priests the spiritual fathers of the community).

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Jeremiah 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.

If Mary is the queen of Heaven, who is this verse from the Old Testament referring to?

Considering Mary was not alive when Jeremiah spoke/wrote, and he was speaking to people about violations in his own time, it's pretty obvious that he is not writing about Mary. The Israelites were pretty well known for their infedility throughout their Scripture. I do not know which religion this refers to, because I have not researched it historically, but I'm sure you could probably very easily find your answer.

The key to understanding Mary's queenship is to understand the "Queen Mother" of the Davidic Kingdom, of which Jesus was the ultimate fulfillment.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
1 John 1:7
the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Why do Catholics believe that a person's sins are cleansed in purgatory by fire? Is the blood of Jesus not powerful enough for Catholics?

It is pricely the blood of Jesus and His ultimate sacrifice on the cross that allows us who die in His friendship, but not yet perfectly purified (because we maintain some grasp still in this sinful world) that we are perfectly purified by God's firey love. It is not a deficit in the sacricife of Jesus Christ; it is the final stage of that sacrifice's application to the individual believer.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Mark 2:7 who can forgive sins but God only?

Why do priests then claim to be able to forgive sins?

Priests do not claim to be able to forgive sins. Priests pronounce the forgiveness of sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit because Jesus Christ specifically gave them this task ("Whosever sins you forgive, they are forgiven. Whosever sins you retain, they are retained.") Priests pronounce the forgiveness of God into the penitants ears and welcome them back into communion with the Body of Christ, the Church.

 

[The Harvest]

Originally posted by GraceSaves:
Let he who has ears, hear:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by The Harvest:
[qb]1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus

Why then is Mary referred to as the mediator?

Mary is not a mediator between God the Father and man, nor does the Church teach so. No one comes to the Father except through the Son. Mary, like any Christian brother or sister, carries our prayers to Jesus, who then takes them to the Father. This does not negate our own ability to take our prayers to Jesus; however, having this ability does not mean it is not good to have others taking our prayers as well.</font>[/QUOTE]book? chapter? verse?

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Matthew 23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

Why do Catholics call priests father?

My biological father is a "man..upon the earth." If we are to call no man on earth our father, we have already sinned. Catholics call priests "father" as a symbol of love, because they help guide us to God the Father, just like our biological fathers should (fathers should be the spiritual leader of the household, priests the spiritual fathers of the community).

i don't call my dad father. and clearly the context is talking about not calling someone the respectful title of father. because you "justify" your sin by saying it's a "symbol of love..." doesn't make it any less of a sin.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Jeremiah 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.

If Mary is the queen of Heaven, who is this verse from the Old Testament referring to?

Considering Mary was not alive when Jeremiah spoke/wrote, and he was speaking to people about violations in his own time, it's pretty obvious that he is not writing about Mary. The Israelites were pretty well known for their infedility throughout their Scripture. I do not know which religion this refers to, because I have not researched it historically, but I'm sure you could probably very easily find your answer.

i know what religion it's talking about. it's ancient babylonian paganism which was the forerunner of catholicism. that's why catholics call mary the queen of heaven. it was passed down to them when paganism fuzed with christianity to form roman catholic paganism.
see "The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop

Originally posted by The Harvest:
1 John 1:7
the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Why do Catholics believe that a person's sins are cleansed in purgatory by fire? Is the blood of Jesus not powerful enough for Catholics?

It is pricely the blood of Jesus and His ultimate sacrifice on the cross that allows us who die in His friendship, but not yet perfectly purified (because we maintain some grasp still in this sinful world)

so the verse should say "the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from some sin then we pay for the rest in purgatory"

that we are perfectly purified by God's firey love. It is not a deficit in the sacricife of Jesus Christ; it is the final stage of that sacrifice's application to the individual believer.

book? chapter? verse?

 

[thessalonian]

Harvest,

To show that you are of good will and that this is not just a pearl casting venture on my part could you answer something for me.

Was Paul sinning when he told the Corinthians that he was their spiritual father in 1 Cor.

1 Corinthians 4:15
For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I BECAME YOUR FATHER through the gospel.

Would someone in Corinth have been sinning in calling him their father or honoring him on father's day based on what he said above?

Was he wrong when he said that Abraham was the father of all who accept Christ? Not just a physical father but a father in faith?

Romans 4:12
and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who ALSO follow in the steps of the faith of OUR FATHER Abraham which he had while uncircumcised

If you show that you are willing to listen as well as speak I will be glad to go through the rest of your objections.
Thanks in advance for your honest answers.
Blessings

Thess

 

[GraceSaves]

For the record, it is clear that you did not, as this thread's title implies, intend to ask Catholics questions. You asked questions that you had no intention of getting answers from, because you already "know" the answers. You wanted to make a public spectacle, not a sincere desire for understanding.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
book? chapter? verse?

Read the monarchial period of the Israelites out of the Hebrew Scriptures, and see that the role of the Queen Mother was one of intercession. Couple that with the belief that those who have died on earth in the faith of Christ are alive in Heaven, as well as Paul's instance on the intercession for him from those he wrote his letters to, and it's not hard to follow. As James said, the fervant prayer of a righteous man accomplishes much. Thus, those in Heaven, who are perfectly righteous by the grace of God and standing in His presence can offer prayers that accomplish much.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
i don't call my dad father.

So people who do call their fathers "father" are guilty of sin? If that is not your point, then you had no reason to make this, other than to dishonestly discredit my analogy. If it is acceptable to call biological fathers "Father," then my argument still stands firm.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
and clearly the context is talking about not calling someone the respectful title of father.

No, the argument is not one of respect, but of pride. Any priest that, for instance, demands he be called "father," would be doing so because of pride. Thankfully, all of the priests I have met have been very humble people. Those who are not I would certainly not hesitate to not call them father. It's simply a custom picked up at one point in the Church's history (I believe out of Ireland).

According to your argument, we should not call them "Pastors" because we have one Shepard, Jesus Christ. And yet, St. Paul refers to himself as the spiritual father, and Jesus told Peter to "tend his flock" (ie, be a shepard). It's about arrogance that Jesus warned.

Let me quote Paul for you: "I am not writing this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my children." 1 Cor. 4:14. Hmmm, Paul never married, and unless he had illegitimate children, he is saying that he is like their father!

Originally posted by The Harvest:
because you "justify" your sin by saying it's a "symbol of love..." doesn't make it any less of a sin.

What a pointless arugment. You haven't shown it's a sin, and nothing done out of love can be a sin, because love is of God.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
i know what religion it's talking about. it's ancient babylonian paganism which was the forerunner of catholicism.

The forerunner of Catholicism? Umm, if you argue that Catholicism took on Paganistic practices, it wouldn't be Babylonian, considering that civilization was LONG gone.

You do realize that Baal was often referred to as "El," which is used as the informal name of God throughout Hebrew Scripture ("Elohim"). By your logic, the term "El" would mean we are worshipping Baal! You need to learn that these titles are general titles. This is the same sad argument that says that "Allah" is a moon god. Well, maybe there was a moon god named Allah. But "Allah" is also the generic name for God in that language.

Again, why did you ask for a response if you weren't going to listen to it?

Originally posted by The Harvest:
that's why catholics call mary the queen of heaven.

Oh, because you know more about Catholics than they do, right? Get off your ego trip, please. Mary's Queenship (only by virtue of her Son's Kingship), her assumption, immaculate conception, intercessional role, etc have an extremely cohesive doctrinal foundation in Old Testament typology. We don't believe it "just because," as much as you'd like to think so. Believe it or not, we actually study things! OH DEAR!

Originally posted by The Harvest:
it was passed down to them when paganism fuzed with christianity to form roman catholic paganism.
see "The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop

You do realize that the basis for the main Catholic Church-Babylon connections has been debunked, right? There have been several thread on this, with one of the primary authors of these books (who is not a Catholic) realizing how bogus the original sources were and writing a new book to discredit his own original one? These are the type of arguments like "IHS" stands for "Isis, Horus, and Seb." Please, look that up, because its sad that drivel like that still passes for "scholarship."

Originally posted by The Harvest:
so the verse should say "the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from some sin then we pay for the rest in purgatory"

Why would it say that? Let me guess...you didn't read my post? Please quote me where I said "we pay for the rest." Because until you do, you, sir, are a liar. This is a flat out lie and libelous statement against me and all Catholics present.

1 Cor. 3:10-15

 

[A_Christian]

I all fairness, just because a person isn't a
Roman Catholic, doesn't mean that person cannot
understand that belief.

Firstly, my father's family were all Catholic,
except his grandfather who had been raised a
Presbyterian.

Secondly, my father was once a very devout Roman
Catholic.

Thirdly, my father was always talking to my
grandmother about salvation when we'd go to visit.

Fourthly, I had been christened Roman Catholic
and that fact always seemed to make my grandmother
happy (works worship).

fifthly, I grew up in a Roman Catholic
neighborhood (Polish & Italian). I soon came to
see that my friends knew more about the traditions
of Mary then any of the Old Testament.

Sixthly, I know that the Immaculate Conception is
a tradition that pertains ONLY to the birth of
Mary and has NOTHING to do with the birth of
Jesus directly. Many Roman Catholics seem to
be confused on this point.

Seventhly, I have a love of Roman Catholics even
though I have a problem with their traditionalism,
ritualism, and misguided trust in dogna without
personal evaluation...

 

[The Harvest]

Originally posted by thessalonian:
Harvest,

To show that you are of good will and that this is not just a pearl casting venture on my part could you answer something for me.

Was Paul sinning when he told the Corinthians that he was their spiritual father in 1 Cor.

1 Corinthians 4:15
For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I BECAME YOUR FATHER through the gospel.

Would someone in Corinth have been sinning in calling him their father or honoring him on father's day based on what he said above?

Was he wrong when he said that Abraham was the father of all who accept Christ? Not just a physical father but a father in faith?

Romans 4:12
and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who ALSO follow in the steps of the faith of OUR FATHER Abraham which he had while uncircumcised

If you show that you are willing to listen as well as speak I will be glad to go through the rest of your objections.
Thanks in advance for your honest answers.
Blessings

Thess

When Jesus said "call no man your father" he was saying not to give a reverent title to a man. The context of what Paul was saying shows that he wasn't wanting to be called Father Paul, but that they were his spiritual childern because he led them to Christ. When we lead people to the Lord we call them our spiritual children, but they don't call us Father. There is a difference between giving somebody a title and having a spiritual connection.

I hope you take this as an honest answer and not as patronizing or out of good will.

 

[The Harvest]

Originally posted by GraceSaves:
For the record, it is clear that you did not, as this thread's title implies, intend to ask Catholics questions. You asked questions that you had no intention of getting answers from, because you already "know" the answers. You wanted to make a public spectacle, not a sincere desire for understanding.

you are incorrect in your assumptions. i want to know why catholics believe what they do when scripture clearly goes against their beliefs.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
book? chapter? verse?

Read the monarchial period of the Israelites out of the Hebrew Scriptures, and see that the role of the Queen Mother was one of intercession. Couple that with the belief that those who have died on earth in the faith of Christ are alive in Heaven, as well as Paul's instance on the intercession for him from those he wrote his letters to, and it's not hard to follow. As James said, the fervant prayer of a righteous man accomplishes much. Thus, those in Heaven, who are perfectly righteous by the grace of God and standing in His presence can offer prayers that accomplish much.

Show me the book, chapter and verse that says Mary is the Queen of Heaven.

Why would people who are in the presence of Christ pray to Him? Do you pray to people when they stand next to you? The very nature of prayer is talking to God and taking by faith that He hears you. If you are standing with God and talking to Him, there's no faith needed.

Also, if you have been washed in the blood of the Lamb, you are righteous right now because you have Christ's righteousness. You don't have to wait until you get to Heaven for perfect righteousness. (see Rom 3:22, 5:17, 8:10, 10:6 and many many more)

Originally posted by The Harvest:
and clearly the context is talking about not calling someone the respectful title of father.

No, the argument is not one of respect, but of pride. Any priest that, for instance, demands he be called "father," would be doing so because of pride. Thankfully, all of the priests I have met have been very humble people. Those who are not I would certainly not hesitate to not call them father. It's simply a custom picked up at one point in the Church's history (I believe out of Ireland).

so customs of men become spiritual after a certain amount of time?

Originally posted by The Harvest:
because you "justify" your sin by saying it's a "symbol of love..." doesn't make it any less of a sin.

What a pointless arugment. You haven't shown it's a sin, and nothing done out of love can be a sin, because love is of God.

nothing done out of love can be a sin? book? chapter? verse? how about this one.
Rom 14:23 for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
i know what religion it's talking about. it's ancient babylonian paganism which was the forerunner of catholicism.

The forerunner of Catholicism? Umm, if you argue that Catholicism took on Paganistic practices, it wouldn't be Babylonian, considering that civilization was LONG gone.

that may be true, but just because the civilization was gone doesn't mean their religious practices were. the roman empire is gone, but we still have roman catholcism.

You do realize that Baal was often referred to as "El," which is used as the informal name of God throughout Hebrew Scripture ("Elohim"). By your logic, the term "El" would mean we are worshipping Baal! You need to learn that these titles are general titles. This is the same sad argument that says that "Allah" is a moon god. Well, maybe there was a moon god named Allah. But "Allah" is also the generic name for God in that language.

1. your "Hebrew Scripture" arguments are of no point to me since i don't know Hebrew (and i'm betting you don't either) and because even if i did i would still use only the AV1611
2. you obviously know nothing about Islam. the god of Islam is NOT the God of the Bible

Again, why did you ask for a response if you weren't going to listen to it?

i do want responses and i am listening. otherwise how could i respond?

Originally posted by The Harvest:
that's why catholics call mary the queen of heaven.

Oh, because you know more about Catholics than they do, right?

sadly i do know more about what catholics believe than many (not all) catholics do. if they knew what they truly believed, they wouldn't be in that cult. just like mormons, most of them don't know what their "church" truly believes.

Get off your ego trip, please. Mary's Queenship (only by virtue of her Son's Kingship), her assumption, immaculate conception, intercessional role, etc have an extremely cohesive doctrinal foundation in Old Testament typology. We don't believe it "just because," as much as you'd like to think so. Believe it or not, we actually study things! OH DEAR!

you cannot base new testament doctrine solely off old testament typology. there has to be some kind of "law", if you will, in the new testament upon which to base doctrine during the church age.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
it was passed down to them when paganism fuzed with christianity to form roman catholic paganism.
see "The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop

You do realize that the basis for the main Catholic Church-Babylon connections has been debunked, right? There have been several thread on this, with one of the primary authors of these books (who is not a Catholic) realizing how bogus the original sources were and writing a new book to discredit his own original one? These are the type of arguments like "IHS" stands for "Isis, Horus, and Seb." Please, look that up, because its sad that drivel like that still passes for "scholarship."

never heard this before. you got references?

Originally posted by The Harvest:
so the verse should say "the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from some sin then we pay for the rest in purgatory"

Why would it say that? Let me guess...you didn't read my post? Please quote me where I said "we pay for the rest." Because until you do, you, sir, are a liar. This is a flat out lie and libelous statement against me and all Catholics present.

you said "It is pricely the blood of Jesus and His ultimate sacrifice on the cross that allows us who die in His friendship, but not yet perfectly purified (because we maintain some grasp still in this sinful world) that we are perfectly purified by God's firey love."
the Bible says "the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin."

so either His blood cleanses us from ALL sin and we go to Heaven when we die, or His blood cleanses us from SOME sin and we go to purgatory to "finish it off" when we die.

by the way, we're all liars. but i didn't lie here. you're just mad because i'm poking holes in the catholic beliefs.
Ga 4:16
Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?

 

[mozier]

Harvest, those who know me on the Baptist Board know that I am no fan of the Roman Catholic Church.

But as a former Roman Catholic, who has
every reason to despise the Roman Catholic Church and its teachings, I still have to say that you, Harvest, are a troll.

Your post was not constructive at all, and will only serve to provoke negative responses and alienation from Roman Catholics. What kind of intent is that? And puh-leeze, do NOT act all innocent and say, "I was only trying to get Roman Catholics to think about how unbiblical their church is!" Baloney, dude. The positions of the Roman Catholics are well-entrenched here, and your post will do absolutely NOTHING to change their minds that their beliefs are unbiblical. Besides, don't you know that Roman Catholicism is not a Bible-only church? They also put equal weight on what they perceive to be Sacred Tradition. If you didn't know this then, then consider yourself now informed.

Regardless, Harvest, your post was completely pointless and unnecessary. Your post was not to ask an honest question, but rather alienate Roman Catholics even further. It was dishonest on your part, and a very, very poor witness on your behalf.


mozier

 

[The Harvest]

i have a two-fold purpose in this post.

1. to find out why they believe what they believe when confronted with the word of God

2. hoping that someone who isn't necessarily a regular on here, or is not so indoctrinated in the falsehoods of the RCC will read these posts and see that the Bible condemns much of the traditions and beliefs of the Catholic church. and that they will question catholocism and find for themselves the true God and true salvation from the Bible which says that salvation is by grace through faith NOT OF WORKS of any type

if you don't agree with my methods then that's ok. i may not necessarily agree with yours.

by the way..."troll"? i've been called a lot of things on here, but that is a new one.

[ October 06, 2003, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: The Harvest ]

 

[The Harvest]

Besides, don't you know that Roman Catholicism is not a Bible-only church?

yeah, and that should be enough alone for them to realize that something is wrong.

 

[GraceSaves]

 

[GraceSaves]

Originally posted by The Harvest:
you are incorrect in your assumptions. i want to know why catholics believe what they do when scripture clearly goes against their beliefs.

This is an impossibility. If you know our beliefs are "clearly" against Scriptures, then you would have no reason to ask us about them, because you already know! And your original questions were not "why" do you believe this; they were "explain this doctrine"-style questions. Not one of them were "Why do you believe in this doctrine?" So, please do not change your original intention in the middle of the thread, ok?

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Show me the book, chapter and verse that says Mary is the Queen of Heaven.

Show me the book, chapter and verse that says that the Queen of Heaven Jeremiah was referring to is applicable to the Catholic belief about Mary. Without it, it is only your assumption.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Why would people who are in the presence of Christ pray to Him?

Does not one communicate in prayer? Or worship? Are not these things that we will do in the presence of God?

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Do you pray to people when they stand next to you?

I speak to them and ask them to pray for me, which is what I do with the saints in Heaven.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
The very nature of prayer is talking to God and taking by faith that He hears you. If you are standing with God and talking to Him, there's no faith needed.

You're defining prayer as you see fit, which makes for a big circular argument.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Also, if you have been washed in the blood of the Lamb, you are righteous right now because you have Christ's righteousness. You don't have to wait until you get to Heaven for perfect righteousness. (see Rom 3:22, 5:17, 8:10, 10:6 and many many more)

This is too big of a discussion for this thread of multiple questions.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
so customs of men become spiritual after a certain amount of time?

Who said anything about it being spiritual? You did; I didn't see anyone else. Please do not create problems when you can't find them in the discussion already.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
nothing done out of love can be a sin? book? chapter? verse? how about this one.
Rom 14:23 for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Actually, some translations read "conviction" instead of faith. Either way, please explain how God is love, and yet an act of love is sinful. You merely sidestepped it without addressing it.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
that may be true, but just because the civilization was gone doesn't mean their religious practices were. the roman empire is gone, but we still have roman catholcism.

1) You have not proven that the Babylonian religion continues on.
2) You have not proven that Catholicism is born of the Roman Empire.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
1. your "Hebrew Scripture" arguments are of no point to me since i don't know Hebrew (and i'm betting you don't either) and because even if i did i would still use only the AV1611

What kind of nonsense response is that? You don't have to know Hebrew to understand my point. I explained myself. You sidestepped. The ball is in your court.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
2. you obviously know nothing about Islam. the god of Islam is NOT the God of the Bible

You obviously didn't read what I wrote, becuase that is not an argument I made.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
i do want responses and i am listening. otherwise how could i respond?

Read above. You have made all kinds of accusations that I didn't even bring up.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
sadly i do know more about what catholics believe than
many (not all) catholics do.

God called. He wants His omniscience back.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
if they knew what they truly believed, they wouldn't be in that cult. just like mormons, most of them don't know what their "church" truly believes.

You, sir, are just about the most judgemental person I have ever met. Life is just one big conspiracy, and you're the only one who has caught on. Congrats.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
you cannot base new testament doctrine solely off old testament typology.

Who said anything about solely? Once again, you create an argument where there is none.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
there has to be some kind of "law", if you will, in the new testament upon which to base doctrine during the church age.

Let me guess: You have all the keys? Congrats again.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
never heard this before. you got references?

I'll look it up and post it tonight. Being as this was discussed here before, if anyone else has the author and the two books he wrote, it would be greatly appreciated.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
you said "It is pricely the blood of Jesus and His ultimate sacrifice on the cross that allows us who die in His friendship, but not yet perfectly purified (because we maintain some grasp still in this sinful world) that we are perfectly purified by God's firey love."

Yes, I did say that. And this was your response:

"the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from some sin then we pay for the rest in purgatory"

I said God purifies us; you said "we purify ourselves." You create an arguement where there is none, and in this case, you lied about me and used words I would never dream of saying.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
the Bible says "the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin."

Yes, and if you don't see that we agree with that statement, then you have not even cracked a Catholic Catechism to understand the difference in eternal and temporal punishment. And if you haven't checked the Catechism, then you lied about knowing a lot about Catholicism, and frankly have no right to say you KNOW what Catholics believe better than Catholics do.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
so either His blood cleanses us from ALL sin and we go to Heaven when we die, or His blood cleanses us from SOME sin and we go to purgatory to "finish it off" when we die.

Where in the Bible does it talk about when the cleansing occurs, or when it finishes? Book, chapter and verse?

Originally posted by The Harvest:
by the way, we're all liars. but i didn't lie here. you're just mad because i'm poking holes in the catholic beliefs.

Cop-out answer. The only thing you have poked a hole in is your ability to honestly dialogue with others.

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Ga 4:16
Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?

Matt 5:44
"But I say to you, Love your enemies..."

From the man who can't wait for John Paul II to die (see other thread), I don't think you're very familiar with Christian love.

 

[dumbox1]

I'll look it up and post it tonight. Being as this was discussed here before, if anyone else has the author and the two books he wrote, it would be greatly appreciated.

Hi GraceSaves,

I think you're thinking of Ralph Woodrow. His first book, "Babylon Mystery Religion," was based largely on Hislop. Later, however, he was shown evidence that Hislop's "history" was not reliable, so he went back and rexamined his source.

Mr. Woodrow discovered, in his words, that "Hislop's 'history' was often only mythology. Even though myths may sometimes reflect events that actually happened, an arbitrary piecing together of ancient myths can not provide a sound basis for history. Take enough tribes, enough tales, enough time, jump from one time to another, from one country to another, pick and choose similarities -- why anything could be 'proved'!" (You can read Mr. Woodrow's statement in full on the amazon.com website).

As a result of his research, he withdrew "Babylon Mystery Religion" from publication and published a new book, "The Babylon Connection?", which debunked his previous book, and Hislop's "The Two Babylons."

Personally, I don't find Mr. Woodrow's writing style to be to my taste, but he's certainly a fine example of honor among authors.

Hope this helps,

Mark H.

 

[GraceSaves]

Mark,

That is exactly the example I was referring to. Thank you!

 

[GraceSaves]

Originally posted by The Harvest:
2. hoping that someone who isn't necessarily a regular on here, or is not so indoctrinated in the falsehoods of the RCC will read these posts and see that the Bible condemns much of the traditions and beliefs of the Catholic church. and that they will question catholocism and find for themselves the true God and true salvation from the Bible which says that salvation is by grace through faith NOT OF WORKS of any type

I pity the person who changes their religious beliefs based on your attitude, your methods, and your disinformation. Even if you were absolutely right doctrinally, your heart is from its practice on this board.

 

[Carson Weber]

the Bible which says that salvation is by grace through faith NOT OF WORKS of any type

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! By his great mercy we have been born anew to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead ... For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit; in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 1:3;3:18-21)

Scripture explicitly says that as eight people were saved through water so we are saved in baptism. Scripture explicitly says that baptism isn't merely a symbol. It says that baptism isn't simply a removal of dirt from the body. Scripture explicitly says that baptism is an appeal to God for a clear conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is how we are born anew.

This is the constant, unchanging faith of the Church from the beginning. It has not changed and it will not change. Learn Scripture. Learn history. Erase the ignorance.

 

[The Harvest]

Show me the book, chapter and verse that says that the Queen of Heaven Jeremiah was referring to is applicable to the Catholic belief about Mary. Without it, it is only your assumption.

i was only showing that there was a "queen of heaven" in the old testament days too and people's worship of her angered God.

Does not one communicate in prayer? Or worship? Are not these things that we will do in the presence of God?

pray in the presence of God: no
worship in the presence of God: yes
but we're not talking about worship

I speak to them and ask them to pray for me, which is what I do with the saints in Heaven.

ok fine. how do you know they are listening?

Originally posted by The Harvest:
Also, if you have been washed in the blood of the Lamb, you are righteous right now because you have Christ's righteousness. You don't have to wait until you get to Heaven for perfect righteousness. (see Rom 3:22, 5:17, 8:10, 10:6 and many many more)

This is too big of a discussion for this thread of multiple questions.

that's too bad. did you look them up? they will help answer this question... "Where in the Bible does it talk about when the cleansing occurs, or when it finishes? Book, chapter and verse?"

please explain how God is love, and yet an act of love is sinful. You merely sidestepped it without addressing it.

didn't say that an act of love is sinful. you said that calling a man "Father" is out of love. all i said was that calling a man the title of "Father" which is God's title, is sin. your motive might be good, but it is still a sin. if i steal food for my family because they are starving, i still sinned in stealing even though my motive was good.

You, sir, are just about the most judgemental person I have ever met. Life is just one big conspiracy, and you're the only one who has caught on. Congrats.

i happen to live in an area that is a majority mormon. so i have to learn quite a bit about their doctrine in order to witness to them better. i don't claim to know everything about every religion.

Mary's Queenship (only by virtue of her Son's Kingship), her assumption, immaculate conception, intercessional role, etc have an extremely cohesive doctrinal foundation in Old Testament typology

Who said anything about solely? Once again, you create an argument where there is none.

my apologies. i shouldn't have said solely. what is, then, the new testament basis for the things listed above about mary?

I said God purifies us; you said "we purify ourselves." You create an arguement where there is none, and in this case, you lied about me and used words I would never dream of saying.

if the blood of Christ purifies us (that means pure..as in no sin) why would a person go to purgatory?

 

[The Harvest]

Carson,

1 Pe 3:21
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

baptism by water has never and will never save anyone. this verse you used even says so. the filth of the flesh is sin. baptism in water does not wash away sin. the blood of Jesus Christ washes away sin. baptism for the believer is just symbolic of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ and it identifies the believer with Christ and symbolizes the death of our flesh and sinful lives.

Eph 2:8
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9
Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Tit 3:5
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost

also keep in mind that for us in the Church Age, our spokesman is Paul, not Peter. we are to follow the gospel that Paul preached...
Rom 15:16
That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles.
1 Corinthians 4:16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me. (also see 1 Cor 11:1, Philp 3:17)

the gospel that Paul preached is for the gentiles and it's in
1 Cor 15:1
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which
also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
1 Cor 15:2
By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless
ye have believed in vain.
1 Cor 15:3
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for
our sins according to the scriptures;
1 Cor 15:4
And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the
scriptures:

Paul explained how we are currently saved in
Rom 10:9
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine
heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Rom 10:10
For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is
made unto salvation.
Rom 10:13
For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

not one thing in there about baptism. it's by trusting in Jesus and His death, burial and resurrection and taking His payment for our sins by faith.

 

[Carson Weber]

Hi Harvest,

I see that you disagree with Scripture.

baptism by water has never and will never save anyone.

Of course it does. I just showed you that it does. You quoted a whole bunch of other Scriptures, thus attempting to negate the Word of God with your traditions of men, but that won't work with this Bible believing Christian. The Bible tells me that baptism saves me, and that's good enough for me.

It may not be good enough for you, and you may wish to wash over this verse and jump through hoops, but that's the task of a non-Catholic who must go against what the Bible plainly teaches.