The "Pagan" roots of the "Traditions" of Rome

Still don't "git it", do you?

Justin is stating that the pagans have a copy of they truth. Why can't you see that? It is not we in the Faith who have copied them, it is they in paganism who have the truth in an impure form, using it to worship devils rather than the true God.

Youse guys have it backwards.

 

Well, Jerry, just for argument's sake....

suppose that your hypothesis is correct.

Suppose that paganism entered the Church via the Roman rite and the whole thing proceeded, rather rapidly, to corrupt itself and become not "the Gospel" but rather something else, of which believing in damns one to eternal torment?

Suppose....

Do you realize then what that means in regards to Matthew 16: 18 - 19?

It means that the promises of our Lord are not worth a hill of spit. It means that He is helpless to protect the very Church and the very Bride for which He died. It means that if these promises cannot be kept, how can I be sure that any other promise of His has validity and surety attached to it?

It means that you and I have a whole bunch of problems theologically, for if we cannot trust Jesus to not only protect the Church from error, but to lead it as well, then how can we be sure that ANY of the miriads of beliefs out there, all of whom claim to be "Bible based" or some such, can be trusted as from Jesus?

And how do we know He can keep US if He couldn't keep the Church?

Now THAT, sir, is a BIG one!!

You think on it a bit before you run off a quick answer, okay?

Oh, and one more thing....if the devil could win on that one, what makes you think that he can't win in the "big picture" at the end of time? If he can trump Jesus, corrupt the Church, and send BILLIONS of people to hell who lived between the years of....oh, say 325 AD and 1517 when the Reformation got started....then how do you KNOW that he won't do it again at the end of time. After all, if -- and I say "IF" only for argument's sake, not that I believe it for a NYC minute -- if the evil one is powerful or sneaky enough to trump Jesus once, you have NO GUARENTEE that he won't do it again.

Now think on that!!!

 

Jerry, you have it completly backwards!

Justin is saying that the Mithras are imitating the Christians.

BTW, I don't blame you for not produing the whole chapter; it sure doesn't look like your church does it?

"Chapter LXVI: Of The Eucharist.
And this food is called among us Eucharisti'a 5 [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration , and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. 6 For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me,7 this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn."

Sounds pretty Catholic don't it?

 

yep, the Christmas Tree and the Easter Egg is of the Devil!!!

 

This is a very strong argument, IMHO. Jesus promised, at the end of Matthew's gospel, "I will be with you always, even unto the end of the age."
Of course, Joseph Smith didn't believe this promise, nor did Luther...

 

Your whole argument is based on the "fiction" that the present day church at Rome was ever the church which the Lord founded.There is no evidence of that.

No, Jerry, Rome is the headquarters of the visible Church. Our Lord founded His Church upon St. Peter. When St. Peter went to Rome, that established Rome as the headquarters. But in the Church, there are many and various parts, such as the Copts, the Byzantines, etc.

According to the Reformers "the visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men in which the pure word of God is preached.".

Oh THAT is rich.

And I suppose that Calvin would believe that the Puritans were preaching the "pure word of God" wouldn't he? Perhaps Calvin would believe that the Anabaptists were preaching the "pure word of God." Presbyterians, if you have fergot yer history, had a rather heinous habit of drowning Anabaptists in deep ponds while taunting them.

Perhaps you would show me that congregation where the "pure word of God" is preached, eh? I bet if you identify your particular breed of Protestantism, the rest and others of the Protestants here will set up quite a howl of indignation.

No, Jerry, the Church is where JESUS IS!!! Remember Jesus? You cannot have a kingdom without the King being present. And you cannot have the Bride without Her Husband being there.

So.....no Eucharist....no Church. If the King is not physically present, then it is not THE Church, for He promised that He would be present in His Church when He returned. (Which He did in AD 70)

And that rules out the church at Rome.The word it preaches is nothing but Pagan religion dressed up in Christian garb.Its roots go back to Babylon,and all of her teachings are pagan.Here is her description:

"And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH"(Rev.17:4,5).

Naaaaaaaaaaa......that's a description of Jerusalem. You need to remember that Revelations is the description of the end of the Old Covenant and the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. You have yer harlots all mixed up.

In His grace,--Jerry

You really ought to sign this "In deception" pal. I know....I was in yer shoes until God graciously opened my eyes and brought me out of the Protestant Rebellion and into His Church.

THANK YEW JAAAAAAAAAAAYZUZ!!!