What Is Waiting For Us At The End Of Life?

[MatthewG]

This is such an important lesson from Paul

“One person considers one day to be more holy than another. Another person thinks all days are the same. Each of them should be absolutely sure in their own mind. Whoever thinks that one day is special does so to honor the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to honor the Lord. They give thanks to God. And whoever doesn’t eat meat does so to honor the Lord. They also give thanks to God. We don’t live for ourselves only. And we don’t die for ourselves only. If we live, we live to honor the Lord. If we die, we die to honor the Lord. So whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. Christ died and came back to life. He did this to become the Lord of both the dead and the living. Now then, who are you to judge your brother or sister? Why do you act like you’re better than they are? We will all stand in God’s courtroom to be judged. It is written, “ ‘You can be sure that I live,’ says the Lord. ‘And you can be just as sure that everyone will kneel down in front of me. Every tongue will have to tell the truth about God.’ ” (Isaiah 45:23) So we will all have to explain to God the things we have done. Let us stop judging one another. Instead, decide not to put anything in the way of a brother or sister. Don’t put anything in their way that would make them trip and fall.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭14‬:‭5‬-‭13‬ ‭NIRV‬‬

Romans 14:5-13 One person considers one day to be more holy than another. Another person thinks all days are the same. Each of them should be absolutely sure in their own mind. Whoever thinks that one day is special | New International Reader’s Versi

One person considers one day to be more holy than another. Another person thinks all days are the same. Each of them should be absolutely sure in their own mind. Whoever thinks that one day is special

bible.com

Settle differences and move on, love God and love one another without tripping up each other in fights and debates and bickering.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Everything a person believes is by faith.

Yes.....but belief does not make anything true....believing a lie does not make it truth.
Does the Bible identify the lie? Yes it does.

If you don’t believe that the soul is immortal that is your choice.

If you do believe that the soul is immortal that is your choice.

Again, yes.....but only one option is the truth....which one? Does God want us to believe something that is not true?
Does the Bible tell us which is true? Yes it does.

Everyone needs to decide for themselves; if you wanna state a case you may but no one has to take anyone’s word here for absolute truth as all people need to test all things and pray and ask God to show them the answer nor if man can, but God himself! Prayer is such a great thing the Believer has.

Jesus said that his disciples would "know the truth" and that "the truth would set [them] free". (John 8:31-32)
Set them free from what? The lies promoted by the devil through his "weeds" of counterfeit Christianity.

He also said...."I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6)
So, we cannot come to the Father except through Jesus.....which means accepting all that he taught as truth.
Does the Bible teach us this truth? Yes it does.

But conversely....he also said..."No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him". . . . .“This is why I have said to you, no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” (John 6:44, 65)
So the Father chooses whom he wishes to "draw" and to "grant" entry into his spiritual 'family'. How can we identify this family? By their unity and love for one another. (John 13:34-35)
Does it mean that we can believe whatever we wish? When has that ever been the case? Jehovah has always provided teachers for his people....Jesus did too. (Heb 13:17) Who are our leaders?

Put all those statements together and what is Jesus telling us Matthew?
Is it enough to just believe and hope its right? Or will God lead us to his truth....and "draw" us to it, if he finds an open heart agreeable to all that his son taught us, rather than what any church or individual teaches, if its based on old errors?

 

[MatthewG]

No one said. Don’t teach or share the Bible,

But only willing people are willing to learn.

And I personally believe it should be done in conjunction with the spirit.

And I also believe people should explore and question God while they go through the Bible. And Challenge anything they been taught.

I had to it was only hearing the word that fortifies and increased faith (trusting God) even Jesus and his victory.

 

[Augustin56]

Oh dear......surely you are not suggesting that the Roman Catholic church “wrote and set the canon for the NT”?
It is God’s word, not any man’s. All “the church” did was compile what was already written, and I can assure you that no Catholic writers contributed a single word. All were Jewish. The “church” then made sure that no common person could even read God’s word, which they kept as their exclusive right to access it....under penalty of death I believe. Who would dare question them?

As the Almighty God, YHWH can use even his enemies to accomplish his will....which he has done in the past.
He used Babylon to punish his unfaithful people, but later destroyed Babylon for its conduct. There is a “greater Babylon” spoken about in Revelation....and we are told to “get out of her”. (Rev 18:4-5) This disgusting “harlot” has many daughters who left home to start their own ”churches”. All are going to be destroyed by the God they claim to worship because they took their mother’s false teachings with them....one such being immortality of the soul, along with hellfire.....neither of which is in the Bible and portray God as a fiend who enjoys torturing people......this was seen reflected in the wicked Inquisitions.

“The oral teachings of the apostles” which were not recorded, were also deftly altered little by little, to make the state religion of the Roman Empire acceptable to its pagan minded constituents. Constantine himself was a worshipper of Zeus all of his life. His “baptism” virtually on his deathbed, was as sincere as his sacrifice to Zeus.

The RCC gave birth to “Christendom”, which is not “Christianity” by any biblical definition.

Aunty, as St. John Henry Newman once said, "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant." It is a general observation that Church history argues against Protestantism and that those Protestants who study history deeply many times realize that the Catholic Church is the true Church.

St. Ignatius of Antioch, the bishop of Antioch ordained by St. Peter, was captured by the Romans. While they were transporting him to be martyred for the faith, he wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans around 107-110 A.D., referring to the "Catholic Church," not in such a manner as if he were coining the term, but in such a manner in which he fully expected the Smyrnaeans to understand what he was talking about.
It says in paragraph 8, "Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."

See the entire letter here: https://www.orderofstignatius.org/files/Letters/Ignatius_to_Smyrnaeans.pdf

By all means, all Christians after Christ ascended to heaven belonged to the Catholic Church. There was no other Church. The Orthodox splintered off in the Great Schism in 1054 A.D., and Protestantism didn't arise until the 16th century! Early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly, a Protestant, writes: “As regards ‘Catholic,’ its original meaning was ‘universal’ or ‘general.’ . . . in the latter half of the second century at latest, we find it conveying the suggestion that the Catholic is the true Church as distinct from heretical congregations (cf., e.g., Muratorian Canon). . . . What these early Fathers were envisaging was almost always the empirical, visible society; they had little or no inkling of the distinction which was later to become important between a visible and an invisible Church” (Early Christian Doctrines, 190–1).

The Church preceded the New Testament, whose canon was set by the Catholic Church in the late 4th century at the Councils of Hippo (393 A.D.) and Carthage (397 A.D.). Before that, there was no New Testament described as Scripture! The authors were, indeed, all members of the original Church founded by Christ, the Catholic Church! So, yes, the Catholic Church wrote the New Testament and later set it as Scripture. God inspired the writing, absolutely. But He inspired the men of His Church to do so, with regard to the New Testament.

Let's look at the two models we have before us of learning and following Christ's truths.

A. Christ established a (one) Church, trained men (Apostles) for three years with the entirety of Divine Revelation, and sent them forth to teach and preach all that He had taught them. (Matt. 28:20). At some point, some of what was being orally taught was written down and eventually (late 4th century) became declared worthy of being Scripture, i.e., what we call the New Testament.

OR, we can follow the Protestant approach:

B. Read a translation of the Bible (provided by the Catholic Church originally), according to your own personal interpretation, usually disregarding language as it was used then, as well as cultural norms of the time, and making up your own conclusions and doctrines.

The problem with B, as I see it, is this: The vast, vast majority of humanity was illiterate until long after the Industrial Revolution, I would say that it was only in the latest 100 years give or take, that universal literacy was of interest to humankind. So, for the first 19 centuries of Christianity, the vast, vast majority of humanity would have been excluded from the approach adopted in B, above. Why would Christ want to leave out the vast majority of humanity?

If there were any validity to B, there would be one Protestant denomination, all beleiving the same thing, all interpreting the Bible the same way. But the truth is, there are literally thousands of man-made, doctrinally contradicting denominations (and counting!). If everyone believes something different, how many, at most, can be correct, logically speaking? One! And what's the least? Zero!

 

[Jim B]

Aunty, as St. John Henry Newman once said, "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant." It is a general observation that Church history argues against Protestantism and that those Protestants who study history deeply many times realize that the Catholic Church is the true Church.

St. Ignatius of Antioch, the bishop of Antioch ordained by St. Peter, was captured by the Romans. While they were transporting him to be martyred for the faith, he wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans around 107-110 A.D., referring to the "Catholic Church," not in such a manner as if he were coining the term, but in such a manner in which he fully expected the Smyrnaeans to understand what he was talking about.
It says in paragraph 8, "Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."

See the entire letter here: https://www.orderofstignatius.org/files/Letters/Ignatius_to_Smyrnaeans.pdf

By all means, all Christians after Christ ascended to heaven belonged to the Catholic Church. There was no other Church. The Orthodox splintered off in the Great Schism in 1054 A.D., and Protestantism didn't arise until the 16th century! Early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly, a Protestant, writes: “As regards ‘Catholic,’ its original meaning was ‘universal’ or ‘general.’ . . . in the latter half of the second century at latest, we find it conveying the suggestion that the Catholic is the true Church as distinct from heretical congregations (cf., e.g., Muratorian Canon). . . . What these early Fathers were envisaging was almost always the empirical, visible society; they had little or no inkling of the distinction which was later to become important between a visible and an invisible Church” (Early Christian Doctrines, 190–1).

The Church preceded the New Testament, whose canon was set by the Catholic Church in the late 4th century at the Councils of Hippo (393 A.D.) and Carthage (397 A.D.). Before that, there was no New Testament described as Scripture! The authors were, indeed, all members of the original Church founded by Christ, the Catholic Church! So, yes, the Catholic Church wrote the New Testament and later set it as Scripture. God inspired the writing, absolutely. But He inspired the men of His Church to do so, with regard to the New Testament.

Let's look at the two models we have before us of learning and following Christ's truths.

A. Christ established a (one) Church, trained men (Apostles) for three years with the entirety of Divine Revelation, and sent them forth to teach and preach all that He had taught them. (Matt. 28:20). At some point, some of what was being orally taught was written down and eventually (late 4th century) became declared worthy of being Scripture, i.e., what we call the New Testament.

OR, we can follow the Protestant approach:

B. Read a translation of the Bible (provided by the Catholic Church originally), according to your own personal interpretation, usually disregarding language as it was used then, as well as cultural norms of the time, and making up your own conclusions and doctrines.

The problem with B, as I see it, is this: The vast, vast majority of humanity was illiterate until long after the Industrial Revolution, I would say that it was only in the latest 100 years give or take, that universal literacy was of interest to humankind. So, for the first 19 centuries of Christianity, the vast, vast majority of humanity would have been excluded from the approach adopted in B, above. Why would Christ want to leave out the vast majority of humanity?

If there were any validity to B, there would be one Protestant denomination, all beleiving the same thing, all interpreting the Bible the same way. But the truth is, there are literally thousands of man-made, doctrinally contradicting denominations (and counting!). If everyone believes something different, how many, at most, can be correct, logically speaking? One! And what's the least? Zero!

The true church is the body of Christ, not your denomination. It is arrogant to say otherwise. You can state ad nauseum that your denomination is the original church, etc. but that is just propaganda.

Lie #1: "It is a general observation that Church history argues against Protestantism and that those Protestants who study history deeply many times realize that the Catholic Church is the true Church." Total nonsense!!! The Catholic church is one denomination and has been, since its early years, corrupt and violent.

Lie #2: "The Catholic Church wrote the New Testament and later set it as Scripture"? None of the authors of the New Testament were Catholics!!! With only one exception (Luke), the entire Bible -- both Testaments -- was written by Jews!!! If what you claim has any truth at all, why isn't the Catholic denomination mentioned anywhere in the entire Bible??? Clearly, it is not!

You did write one thing that was correct: The Church preceded the New Testament, whose canon was set by the Catholic Church in the late 4th century at the Councils of Hippo (393 A.D.) and Carthage (397 A.D.). Even though this doesn't account for different canons (whether the apocryphal "books" are included or not) it was your denomination that established the canon of Scripture. However, there are discoveries of other manuscripts from the earliest years that might be included in a revised canon. Stay tuned.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do you really believe that any rational person is going to believe this kind of bizarre "logic"..?

A. Christ established a (one) Church, trained [JEWS, not Catholics, called] Apostles) for three years with the entirety of Divine Revelation, and sent them forth to teach and preach all that He had taught them. (Matt. 28:20). At some point, some of what was being orally taught was written down [by Jews] and eventually (late 4th century) became declared worthy of being Scripture, i.e., what we call the New Testament.

OR, we can follow the Protestant approach (which is not "the Protestant approach!)

B. Read a translation of the Bible (written by Jews) and provided by the Catholic Church originally), according to your own personal interpretation, usually disregarding language as it was used then [a lie!], as well as cultural norms of the time [another lie], and making up your own conclusions and doctrines.

That is absurd!!! Protestants read the Bible, a.k.a., God's word, to understand His inspired words and His will for their lives. They do not follow the unScriptural teachings and practices of your denomination, which has more in common with OT Judaism than it does with Christ's teachings.

Your denomination doesn't follow the Bible!!! It follows the teachings of the (unScriptural) office of the Pope and whatever doctrine can be invented to justify keeping a certain group of men in power. The Catholic denomination has waged wars, practiced genocide, and enslaved innocent people. As I have written recently, the local diocese had to pay $121,000,000 because of the sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests!

You can spout all kinds of mythology, but the truth is that God used Martin Luther and others to rescue His church from the horrors and false teachings of the Catholic denomination, just like Jesus rescued God's truth from the OT Jews.

God loves the world, and has chosen those who worship Him (not the Pope!) in Spirit and in truth.

 

[Jim B]

Let's compare Catholicism to Old Testament Judaism...

OT Jews were the "chosen" people. Catholics believe that they are the "chosen" people and other believers -- God's adopted children -- are not.

OT Jews had a single person mediating between themselves and God. Catholics need the Pope mediating between themselves and God.

There was a separate priesthood in the OT. Catholics have a similar separate priesthood. Protestants have no need for intermediaries between themselves and the heavenly Father.

Forgiveness was accomplished by works (sacrifices) in the OT. Forgiveness for Catholics requires works: penance, prayers, etc.

OT Judaism was centered in one city: Jerusalem. Catholicism is centered in one city: Rome.

The OT Jews conquered indigenous people via warfare. Catholics also conquered indigenous people via warfare.

OT Judaism had, as its center, the temple in Jerusalem. Catholicism has its center as the Vatican in Rome.

OT priests dressed in ornate costumes. Catholic clergy dress in ornate costumes.

Jews confessed their sins to priests, then had to atone by works. Catholics confess their sins to priests, then have to atone by works.

The OT Jews erected a golden calf as an idol to worship. Catholics have many statues (idols) to worship.

The OT Jews worshipped Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Catholics worship "saints" (even though all believers are saints).

Jews have the Bar/Bas Mitzvah ritual to declare children as "adults". Catholics have confirmation for the same purpose.

The Jews, until recently, had an all-male "clergy". Catholics have, even today, an all-male clergy.

Jews practice infant circumcision. Catholics practice infant baptism.

The Jews burned incense in the temple. Catholics burn incense in church.

The Jews were divided in 12 tribes. The Catholics revere 12 apostles.

And there are undoubtedly more similarities between the old covenant Jews and the Catholics, but these were just "off the top of my head".

Protestants believe in Biblically-based, New Testament theology, not a reconstruction of Old Testament Judaism.

 

[Augustin56]

The true church is the body of Christ, not your denomination. It is arrogant to say otherwise. You can state ad nauseum that your denomination is the original church, etc. but that is just propaganda.

Lie #1: "It is a general observation that Church history argues against Protestantism and that those Protestants who study history deeply many times realize that the Catholic Church is the true Church." Total nonsense!!! The Catholic church is one denomination and has been, since its early years, corrupt and violent.

Lie #2: "The Catholic Church wrote the New Testament and later set it as Scripture"? None of the authors of the New Testament were Catholics!!! With only one exception (Luke), the entire Bible -- both Testaments -- was written by Jews!!! If what you claim has any truth at all, why isn't the Catholic denomination mentioned anywhere in the entire Bible??? Clearly, it is not!

You did write one thing that was correct: The Church preceded the New Testament, whose canon was set by the Catholic Church in the late 4th century at the Councils of Hippo (393 A.D.) and Carthage (397 A.D.). Even though this doesn't account for different canons (whether the apocryphal "books" are included or not) it was your denomination that established the canon of Scripture. However, there are discoveries of other manuscripts from the earliest years that might be included in a revised canon. Stay tuned.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do you really believe that any rational person is going to believe this kind of bizarre "logic"..?

A. Christ established a (one) Church, trained [JEWS, not Catholics, called] Apostles) for three years with the entirety of Divine Revelation, and sent them forth to teach and preach all that He had taught them. (Matt. 28:20). At some point, some of what was being orally taught was written down [by Jews] and eventually (late 4th century) became declared worthy of being Scripture, i.e., what we call the New Testament.

OR, we can follow the Protestant approach (which is not "the Protestant approach!)

B. Read a translation of the Bible (written by Jews) and provided by the Catholic Church originally), according to your own personal interpretation, usually disregarding language as it was used then [a lie!], as well as cultural norms of the time [another lie], and making up your own conclusions and doctrines.

That is absurd!!! Protestants read the Bible, a.k.a., God's word, to understand His inspired words and His will for their lives. They do not follow the unScriptural teachings and practices of your denomination, which has more in common with OT Judaism than it does with Christ's teachings.

Your denomination doesn't follow the Bible!!! It follows the teachings of the (unScriptural) office of the Pope and whatever doctrine can be invented to justify keeping a certain group of men in power. The Catholic denomination has waged wars, practiced genocide, and enslaved innocent people. As I have written recently, the local diocese had to pay $121,000,000 because of the sexual abuse of children by Catholic priests!

You can spout all kinds of mythology, but the truth is that God used Martin Luther and others to rescue His church from the horrors and false teachings of the Catholic denomination, just like Jesus rescued God's truth from the OT Jews.

God loves the world, and has chosen those who worship Him (not the Pope!) in Spirit and in truth.

Jim, do you think it's a coincidence that about 1/3 of Christianity is Protestant, and about 1/3 of the angels God created rebelled against Him?

Jim, your viewpoint is that Catholics don't follow your personal interpretation of Scripture, which is correct. The Catholic Church follows the interpretation of Scripture that has been there from the beginning. It's first members in the Early Church wrote the New Testament from the oral teachings handed on by Christ to His Apostles, who passed them on to their successors, the bishops. Protestantism was nowhere around for 16 centuries! It's a man-made, madeup heresy.

And strictly speaking, the Bible is not the Word of God. The Word of God is not a book. It is Someone, namely Jesus Christ. Jesus is the Word of God. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

The Bible is one of the two main transmissions of the Word of God, but only if it is correctly translated. As Galatians 1:8 says, But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed!

The Catholic Church received the entire deposit of faith from Christ and has never changed it. The Catholic Church doesn't have to rely on personal interpretation to try to reinvent the doctrinal wheel. We have Christ's interpretation, and have never changed it.

If you insist on judging the Catholic Church by those who sinned within the Catholic Church, then logically you shouldn't be Christian at all. Why? Because of the first 12 member of Christ's Church, the Apostles, one was Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Him. Another, Peter - the one He chose to first lead His church after He ascended to heaven - denied Him three times. The rest, except for St. John, deserted Him like cowards in His hour of need. So, if you judge the Catholic Church as you have stated, why are you Christian at all? Or are you claiming to be immaculately conceived and sinless?

 

[Jim B]

Jim, do you think it's a coincidence that about 1/3 of Christianity is Protestant, and about 1/3 of the angels God created rebelled against Him?

Jim, your viewpoint is that Catholics don't follow your personal interpretation of Scripture, which is correct. The Catholic Church follows the interpretation of Scripture that has been there from the beginning. It's first members in the Early Church wrote the New Testament from the oral teachings handed on by Christ to His Apostles, who passed them on to their successors, the bishops. Protestantism was nowhere around for 16 centuries! It's a man-made, madeup heresy.

And strictly speaking, the Bible is not the Word of God. The Word of God is not a book. It is Someone, namely Jesus Christ. Jesus is the Word of God. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

The Bible is one of the two main transmissions of the Word of God, but only if it is correctly translated. As Galatians 1:8 says, But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed!

The Catholic Church received the entire deposit of faith from Christ and has never changed it. The Catholic Church doesn't have to rely on personal interpretation to try to reinvent the doctrinal wheel. We have Christ's interpretation, and have never changed it.

If you insist on judging the Catholic Church by those who sinned within the Catholic Church, then logically you shouldn't be Christian at all. Why? Because of the first 12 member of Christ's Church, the Apostles, one was Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Him. Another, Peter - the one He chose to first lead His church after He ascended to heaven - denied Him three times. The rest, except for St. John, deserted Him like cowards in His hour of need. So, if you judge the Catholic Church as you have stated, why are you Christian at all? Or are you claiming to be immaculately conceived and sinless?

I'm not going to discuss this with you any further. You think that you and your denomination are superior to the rest of the body of Christ. I have news for you: there is one head and His name is Jesus Christ (not the Pope). Go ahead and spew your propaganda, even though it is both arrogant and false.

Again, let's compare Catholicism to Old Testament Judaism...

OT Jews were the "chosen" people. Catholics believe that they are the "chosen" people and other believers -- God's adopted children -- are not.

OT Jews had a single person mediating between themselves and God. Catholics need the Pope mediating between themselves and God.

There was a separate priesthood in the OT. Catholics have a similar separate priesthood. Protestants have no need for intermediaries between themselves and the heavenly Father.

Forgiveness was accomplished by works (sacrifices) in the OT. Forgiveness for Catholics requires works: penance, prayers, etc.

OT Judaism was centered in one city: Jerusalem. Catholicism is centered in one city: Rome.

The OT Jews conquered indigenous people via warfare. Catholics also conquered indigenous people via warfare.

OT Judaism had, as its center, the temple in Jerusalem. Catholicism has its center as the Vatican in Rome.

OT priests dressed in ornate costumes. Catholic clergy dress in ornate costumes.

Jews confessed their sins to priests, then had to atone by works. Catholics confess their sins to priests, then have to atone by works.

The OT Jews erected a golden calf as an idol to worship. Catholics have many statues (idols) to worship.

The OT Jews worshipped Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Catholics worship "saints" (even though all believers are saints).

Jews have the Bar/Bas Mitzvah ritual to declare children as "adults". Catholics have confirmation for the same purpose.

The Jews, until recently, had an all-male "clergy". Catholics have, even today, an all-male clergy.

Jews practice infant circumcision. Catholics practice infant baptism.

The Jews burned incense in the temple. Catholics burn incense in church.

The Jews were divided in 12 tribes. The Catholics revere 12 apostles.

And there are undoubtedly more similarities between the old covenant Jews and the Catholics, but these were just "off the top of my head".

Protestants believe in Biblically-based, New Testament theology, not a reconstruction of Old Testament Judaism.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am putting you on "ignore". I will simply paste the above every time that you post Catholic propaganda.

Go confess your many sins to your priest!!!

 

[Aunty Jane]

If there were any validity to B, there would be one Protestant denomination, all beleiving the same thing, all interpreting the Bible the same way. But the truth is, there are literally thousands of man-made, doctrinally contradicting denominations (and counting!). If everyone believes something different, how many, at most, can be correct, logically speaking? One! And what's the least? Zero!

The one thing that you apparently fail to consider is that the “weeds” of counterfeit “Christianity” that Jesus spoke about, were sown very early in Christian history. (Matt 13:24-30, 36-42)
The foretold “apostasy” took over when the last of the apostles had passed away...
2 Thess 2:1-7....
"Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us . . . . .Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion [apostasy] occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. . . . . Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? 6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way."

The restraining presence of the apostles, once removed, allowed men to creep in and corrupt what Christ taught, just as Jesus and the apostles warned that they would. (Acts 20:29-30; 2 Tim 4:3-4)


* Nowhere will we find “Mary the mother of God” anywhere in scripture. The eternal God cannot have a mother.
But looking into pagan concepts we find mother goddess worship with titles of these false goddesses transferred over to Mary.
The Roman Catholic Church, in order to revive the ancient form of worship of "the queen of heaven", as was practiced in the pagan nations of ancient Babylon, Egypt and Rome; and also in the unfaithful ancient nation of Israel. (Jer 44:19)
We will not find them in the Bible at all.

* The immaculate conception is another lie.....Mary and Joseph offered the required "sin offering" for his mother after Jesus' birth.

Under the Mosaic Law, a woman who had given birth was to offer a young ram as a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a turtledove as a sin offering. If the family could not afford a ram, as was evidently the case with Mary and Joseph, then two turtledoves or two young pigeons were acceptable. (Lev 12:6-8; Luke 2:22-24)

* Idolatry involves the “making” of "images of any sort" to be used in worship. (Ex 20:4) This is not just the bowing down before an image.
We are not to even "make" them.

What is this then?



The Israelites held a festival to Yahweh but used a golden calf to represent him.....

What was God's response? He had the offenders put to death.

*There is no “cross” mentioned in the Bible. A “stauros” is not a cross, but it is still an image and used in worship.
It is mainly Catholicism that has the macabre representation of the dead Jesus on it.
Strange that Jesus is mostly represented as either a helpless infant, or a dead man in the RCC.
The Bible portrays him as a mighty King.



* There is no purgatory mentioned in the Bible....and no hellfire.


What kind of God would do this to any living thing?

*There are no rosary beads or repetitious prayers mentioned by Jesus. Even the oft recited "Our Father" was never given as something to be mindlessly and endlessly recited as penance. Jesus said to "pray this way"....he did NOT say, "pray this prayer."

My research reveals that different forms of the Rosary are prayed in Roman Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, the Bahá’í Faith, and Islam. Hinduism also practices celibacy of the clergy, separation from the world, worship of saints, fasting, processions, litanies, and use of holy water. Coincidence?
In each of these religions, the Rosary is made of beads on a string or knotted cord. Islam uses 99 beads and the Hindus and Buddhists use ones with 100 as well as 66 beads. Prayers are repeated as the beads are counted.

"And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words.
8 “Therefore do not be like them. For your Father knows the things you have need of before you ask Him."
(Matthew 6:7-8)

The Rosary was not used by Jesus, by His apostles, or by the early church fathers. The Roman Catholic Church started using the Rosary around A.D. 1350. So from whom were these pagan practices copied? NOT from Jesus...and NOT the apostles.

* No sinful man has the power to grant absolution.
When did the modern practice of Catholic confession begin? According to the older monastic practice, monks confessed their sins to one another to get spiritual help in order to overcome their weaknesses. In newer auricular confession, however, the church claimed for the priest the much greater “power or authority to forgive sins.” (New Catholic Encyclopedia)
So "the church" claimed that authority with no sanction from Jesus Christ or his God and Father.

Sorry, but there is no doctrine in the Catholic church that was ever taught by Jesus or his apostles.

 

[Augustin56]

* Nowhere will we find “Mary the mother of God” anywhere in scripture. The eternal God cannot have a mother.
But looking into pagan concepts we find mother goddess worship with titles of these false goddesses transferred over to Mary.

If you deny that Mary was the mother of God, then you effectively deny that Jesus is God. Mary is Jesus' mother. And Jesus is God. It's not rocket science.

Small sidenote for those interested. There is a medical/scientific thing that takes place whenever a woman becomes pregnant. It's called fetal microchimerism. When a woman becomes pregnant, even if she doesn't carry the child to term, some of the cells from the child travel into the woman's body and live there her whole life! And if she gets sick or injured, some of those cells travel towards the problem area and try to help heal the problem. This was also true for the Virgin Mary.

 

[Augustin56]

* No sinful man has the power to grant absolution.

Again, you don't know your Scripture. Let me draw your attention to the Gospel of John, Chapter 20, verses 19-23:

On the evening of that first day of the week, when the doors were locked, where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and said to them, “Peace be with you.” When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. The disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.”

Here, we have Jesus appearing to the Apostles in the upper room. Refer to the bold printed items... "As the Father has sent me, so I send you." How did the Father send Jesus? With all heavenly authority, including the authority to forgive sins! So, Jesus is sending the Apostles with His Godly authority, including the authority to forgive sins! Then, Jesus breathes on the Apostles. Only two times in all Scripture, does God breathe on man! Once in Genesis when He breathes life into Adam, and once here! So, it must be something really important going on, yes? Then Jesus delegates His Godly authority to them to forgive sins,! "Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained." How can the Apostles know what sins to forgive someone unless and until they confess them to the Apostles? Jesus didn't give them the gift of reading minds, did He?

 

[Augustin56]

The Rosary was not used by Jesus, by His apostles, or by the early church fathers. The Roman Catholic Church started using the Rosary around A.D. 1350." So from whom were these pagan practices copied? NOT from Jesus...and NOT the apostles.

The Rosary is a prayer of the Gospel. Every bit of it comes from the Scriptures. It was and is an excellent tool to pray the Gospel in our daily lives. Keep in mind that it's only been in the last 100 years or so that we have had a majority of humanity able to read and write. But someone could memorize and meditate upon the important parts of the Gospels, yes? The Mysteries of the Rosary are all taken from Scripture. The Annunciation (where the angel appears to Mary in the Gospel of Luke), the Visitation (where Mary visits her cousin, Elizabeth to bring her the "Good News" of Jesus' coming), etc. The prayers are all in there. The Our Father (Lord, teach us to pray...). The Hail Mary (the angel appearing to Mary, "Hail, full of grace...) (Luke 1:28)

What do you have against someone praying the Gospel?

And the Hindu's, Buddhist's, and Muslims do not pray the Rosary. They pray beads, but I can guarantee you they're not meditating on the Gospel.

 

[Raccoon1010]

I've done a little study on NDE's and found that some common aspecs are seeing a person who's face shines like the sun. Could that be Jesus' spirit? Don't know. My goal is to not try to be selfish in life and accept Jesus as my savior. And while I still sin, I have been encouraged by God that perhaps I can be saved. I sure hope so and that my family is also saved. And that seems important to me.

 

[Augustin56]

* The immaculate conception is another lie.....Mary and Joseph offered the required "sin offering" for his mother after Jesus' birth.

Again, you have to know Scripture. And it's not always evident in an English translation. Translations are never completely accurate.

Gabriel’s salutation, “Hail, full of grace,” (kaire, kecharitomene, Greek) is not an ordinary greeting. The angel doesn’t call Mary by her given name (Miryam), but instead gives her a new name or title: “full of grace.” The renaming of Mary also conveys how names communicate something that is permanent about the character of the one named (Abram changed to Abraham—Gen. 17:5, l5; Jacob changed to Israel—Gen. 32:28).

To understand the significance of this name change and how it points to Mary being conceived without sin, we look to the Greek word kecharitomene (“full of grace”), a perfect passive participle, coming from the root word charitoo, or grace, meaning “to fill or endow with grace.” It denotes an action having taken place in the past, before the announcement of the angel, and one that continues throughout her existence. Understood in this way, the words of the angel “full of grace” (free from all stain of original and actual sin) extend to the moment of Mary’s conception and throughout her earthly life. Therefore, she had to have been born without Original Sin, and her state of being "full of grace" was permanent. One cannot sin and be "full of grace."

 

[Augustin56]

* Idolatry involves the “making” of "images of any sort" to be used in worship. (Ex 20:4) This is not just the bowing down before an image.
We are not to even "make" them.

Idolatry (Gr. eidololatria) etymologically denotes Divine worship given to an image, but its signification has been extended to all Divine worship given to anyone or anything but the true God.

People who oppose religious statuary forget about the many passages where the Lord commands the making of statues. For example: “And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be” (Ex. 25:18–20).

David gave Solomon the plan “for the altar of incense made of refined gold, and its weight; also his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all” (1 Chr. 28:18–19). David’s plan for the temple included statues of angels.

Similarly Ezekiel 41:17–18 describes graven (carved) images in the idealized temple he was shown in a vision, for he writes, “On the walls round about in the inner room and [on] the nave were carved likenesses of cherubim.”

Early in its history, Israel was forbidden to make any depictions of God because he had not revealed himself in a visible form. Given the pagan culture surrounding them, the Israelites might have been tempted to worship God in the form of an animal or some natural object (e.g., a bull or the sun).

But later God did reveal himself under visible forms, such as in Daniel 7:9: “As I looked, thrones were placed and one that was Ancient of Days took his seat; his raiment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames, its wheels were burning fire.” Protestants make depictions of the Father under this form when they do illustrations of Old Testament prophecies.

The Holy Spirit revealed himself under at least two visible forms—that of a dove, at the baptism of Jesus (Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32), and as tongues of fire, on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1–4). Protestants use these images when drawing or painting these biblical episodes and when they wear Holy Spirit lapel pins or place dove emblems on their cars.

But more important, in the incarnation of Christ his Son, God showed mankind an icon of himself. Paul said, “He is the image (Greek: ikon) of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” Christ is the tangible, divine “icon” of the unseen, infinite God.

We read that when the magi were “going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshipped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold, frankincense, and myrrh” (Matt. 2:11). Though God did not reveal a form for himself on Mount Horeb, he did reveal one in the house in Bethlehem.

Common sense tells us that, since God has revealed himself in various images, most especially in the incarnate Jesus Christ, it’s not wrong for us to use images of these forms to deepen our knowledge and love of God. That’s why God revealed himself in these visible forms, and that’s why statues and pictures are made of them.

 

[Augustin56]

I've done a little study on NDE's and found that some common aspecs are seeing a person who's face shines like the sun. Could that be Jesus' spirit? Don't know. My goal is to not try to be selfish in life and accept Jesus as my savior. And while I still sin, I have been encouraged by God that perhaps I can be saved. I sure hope so and that my family is also saved. And that seems important to me.

As long as you have breath in your body, you have a shot at heaven! Repent of your sins (meaning turn away from them completely).

I recall the story of a man who was dying in the hospital who had rejected God. A relative called Bishop Fulton Sheen to see if he would go talk to him and perhaps help him. So, Bishop Sheen went to the hospital and walked into the man's room. He was close to the end. The man got angry, though, and told Bishop Sheen that he had not called him there and wanted nothing to do with God or the Church! So, Bishop Sheen asked him, "Would you just do one thing for me, then, and I will leave?" The man said, "What?!" Bishop Sheen said, "Just say, 'My Jesus, mercy!'" as a prayer. The man said, "No! I will not! Now get out!" So, Bishop Sheen left, and as he was leaving, he told the nurse to call him if anything changed or the man changed his mind. About 2am, the nurse called him and let him know that the man had died. Bishop Sheen asked him if he had said anything. The nurse said, "Well, as soon as you left, he kept repeating, 'My Jesus, mercy.' until he died."

I don't think anyone is so sinful that God wouldn't forgive him if he repented before he died.
Consider the story of Rudolf Hoess, who was raised Catholic as a boy, but drifted from the faith, eventually joining the Nazi’s in pre-WWII Germany. He rose in ranks and was eventually appointed Commandant of one of the largest concentration camps, Auschwitz. He testified that he was responsible for as many as 3 million deaths of innocent people, including those who died in the gas chambers and those who starved to death. One day, the Nazi’s arrested a company of Jesuit priests. The superior, Fr. Władysław Lohn, had been away on business, so they didn’t arrest him. They put them to death the next day in the gas chambers. The superior, upon his return, asked where his men had gone. They told him the Nazi’s arrested them and took them to the camp. He snuck into the camp looking for them, and they arrested him, too! When they took him to Hoess, for some unknown reason, he released Fr. Lohn.

Once the war ended, Hoess went into hiding and was eventually caught, and put on trial at Nuremberg, where he was found guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced to be executed by hanging. Hoess was not afraid to die, but his greatest fear was that he would be treated like he treated the people in his concentration camp. Much to his surprise, they treated him with kindness and dignity. It got him to thinking, so he asked to speak with a priest. They asked several priests in the area, all of whom declined because they had lost family members and friends to this man. Finally, they found one. It Fr. Władysław Lohn. Fr. Lohn came and spoke with Hoess for over three hours, hearing his confession. The next day, Fr. Lohn came back and gave Hoess Holy Communion for the first time in decades, as Hoess knelt, with tears running down his cheeks. Afterward, Hoess was escorted to the gallows and hanged.

 

[Raccoon1010]

As long as you have breath in your body, you have a shot at heaven! Repent of your sins (meaning turn away from them completely).

I recall the story of a man who was dying in the hospital who had rejected God. A relative called Bishop Fulton Sheen to see if he would go talk to him and perhaps help him. So, Bishop Sheen went to the hospital and walked into the man's room. He was close to the end. The man got angry, though, and told Bishop Sheen that he had not called him there and wanted nothing to do with God or the Church! So, Bishop Sheen asked him, "Would you just do one thing for me, then, and I will leave?" The man said, "What?!" Bishop Sheen said, "Just say, 'My Jesus, mercy!'" as a prayer. The man said, "No! I will not! Now get out!" So, Bishop Sheen left, and as he was leaving, he told the nurse to call him if anything changed or the man changed his mind. About 2am, the nurse called him and let him know that the man had died. Bishop Sheen asked him if he had said anything. The nurse said, "Well, as soon as you left, he kept repeating, 'My Jesus, mercy.' until he died."

I don't think anyone is so sinful that God wouldn't forgive him if he repented before he died.
Consider the story of Rudolf Hoess, who was raised Catholic as a boy, but drifted from the faith, eventually joining the Nazi’s in pre-WWII Germany. He rose in ranks and was eventually appointed Commandant of one of the largest concentration camps, Auschwitz. He testified that he was responsible for as many as 3 million deaths of innocent people, including those who died in the gas chambers and those who starved to death. One day, the Nazi’s arrested a company of Jesuit priests. The superior, Fr. Władysław Lohn, had been away on business, so they didn’t arrest him. They put them to death the next day in the gas chambers. The superior, upon his return, asked where his men had gone. They told him the Nazi’s arrested them and took them to the camp. He snuck into the camp looking for them, and they arrested him, too! When they took him to Hoess, for some unknown reason, he released Fr. Lohn.

Once the war ended, Hoess went into hiding and was eventually caught, and put on trial at Nuremberg, where he was found guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced to be executed by hanging. Hoess was not afraid to die, but his greatest fear was that he would be treated like he treated the people in his concentration camp. Much to his surprise, they treated him with kindness and dignity. It got him to thinking, so he asked to speak with a priest. They asked several priests in the area, all of whom declined because they had lost family members and friends to this man. Finally, they found one. It Fr. Władysław Lohn. Fr. Lohn came and spoke with Hoess for over three hours, hearing his confession. The next day, Fr. Lohn came back and gave Hoess Holy Communion for the first time in decades, as Hoess knelt, with tears running down his cheeks. Afterward, Hoess was escorted to the gallows and hanged.

OK, but that story has nothing to do with my life. I don't reject God. But I'm not perfect either.

 

[Jim B]

The one thing that you apparently fail to consider is that the “weeds” of counterfeit “Christianity” that Jesus spoke about, were sown very early in Christian history. (Matt 13:24-30, 36-42)
The foretold “apostasy” took over when the last of the apostles had passed away...
2 Thess 2:1-7....
"Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us . . . . .Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion [apostasy] occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. . . . . Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? 6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way."

The restraining presence of the apostles, once removed, allowed men to creep in and corrupt what Christ taught, just as Jesus and the apostles warned that they would. (Acts 20:29-30; 2 Tim 4:3-4)


* Nowhere will we find “Mary the mother of God” anywhere in scripture. The eternal God cannot have a mother.
But looking into pagan concepts we find mother goddess worship with titles of these false goddesses transferred over to Mary.
The Roman Catholic Church, in order to revive the ancient form of worship of "the queen of heaven", as was practiced in the pagan nations of ancient Babylon, Egypt and Rome; and also in the unfaithful ancient nation of Israel. (Jer 44:19)
We will not find them in the Bible at all.

* The immaculate conception is another lie.....Mary and Joseph offered the required "sin offering" for his mother after Jesus' birth.

Under the Mosaic Law, a woman who had given birth was to offer a young ram as a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a turtledove as a sin offering. If the family could not afford a ram, as was evidently the case with Mary and Joseph, then two turtledoves or two young pigeons were acceptable. (Lev 12:6-8; Luke 2:22-24)

* Idolatry involves the “making” of "images of any sort" to be used in worship. (Ex 20:4) This is not just the bowing down before an image.
We are not to even "make" them.

What is this then?

View attachment 32305 View attachment 32308 View attachment 32307

The Israelites held a festival to Yahweh but used a golden calf to represent him.....
View attachment 32309
What was God's response? He had the offenders put to death.

*There is no “cross” mentioned in the Bible. A “stauros” is not a cross, but it is still an image and used in worship.
It is mainly Catholicism that has the macabre representation of the dead Jesus on it.
Strange that Jesus is mostly represented as either a helpless infant, or a dead man in the RCC.
The Bible portrays him as a mighty King.

View attachment 32310 View attachment 32311

* There is no purgatory mentioned in the Bible....and no hellfire.

View attachment 32312
What kind of God would do this to any living thing?

*There are no rosary beads or repetitious prayers mentioned by Jesus. Even the oft recited "Our Father" was never given as something to be mindlessly and endlessly recited as penance. Jesus said to "pray this way"....he did NOT say, "pray this prayer."

My research reveals that different forms of the Rosary are prayed in Roman Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, the Bahá’í Faith, and Islam. Hinduism also practices celibacy of the clergy, separation from the world, worship of saints, fasting, processions, litanies, and use of holy water. Coincidence?
In each of these religions, the Rosary is made of beads on a string or knotted cord. Islam uses 99 beads and the Hindus and Buddhists use ones with 100 as well as 66 beads. Prayers are repeated as the beads are counted.

"And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words.
8 “Therefore do not be like them. For your Father knows the things you have need of before you ask Him."
(Matthew 6:7-8)

The Rosary was not used by Jesus, by His apostles, or by the early church fathers. The Roman Catholic Church started using the Rosary around A.D. 1350." So from whom were these pagan practices copied? NOT from Jesus...and NOT the apostles.

* No sinful man has the power to grant absolution.
When did the modern practice of Catholic confession begin? According to the older monastic practice, monks confessed their sins to one another to get spiritual help in order to overcome their weaknesses. In newer auricular confession, however, the church claimed for the priest the much greater “power or authority to forgive sins.” (New Catholic Encyclopedia)
So "the church" claimed that authority with no sanction from Jesus Christ or his God and Father.

Sorry, but there is no doctrine in the Catholic church that was ever taught by Jesus or his apostles.

Great post!

 

[Augustin56]

OK, but that story has nothing to do with my life. I don't reject God. But I'm not perfect either.

The post wasn't about you rejecting God, but you seemed to need hope. There is always hope is you are alive.

 

[Raccoon1010]

The post wasn't about you rejecting God, but you seemed to need hope. There is always hope is you are alive.

Yes, I have mental dysfunction so I'm not perfect and have errors. Perhaps it's not my fault. But God has given me hope recently that perhaps I'll be OK and can live with him in heaven after I die.