The true gospel

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

Hi everyone. My name is Oliver Fischer. I was formerly a "Catholic", born, raised and schooled that way.

I had no particular interest in God, I guess the religion was just thrown in my face really. I'm sure it was all good intentions. Anyway, in 2001 I had fellowship and study of the word in the bible which led me in turn to renounce Catholicism. In fact, in caused me to renounce "religion". I hope i don't lose u here, when I refer to religion I'm not referring to faith but rather something outward, tradition etc.

Anyway, I have discovered through wonderful fellowship and meeting with other saints(brothers and sisters) , I found some remarkably simple but enlightening things about God, the church, God's purpose and so on.

- God became man to make man the same as He is in life and in nature, but not in the God-Head. - Having a corporate man that matches Him will be His counterpart and bride in the church. - God wants man to enjoy Him as the reality of all positive things in this universe. Not just outwardly serve Him. - God searches the hearts of man. Though someone may err, Jesus tells us that we cannot avoid stumbling blocks. - Before we condemn others, what they practise or speak, we need to look at ourselves. We need to remove the beam from our own eyes first. - We need to love one another, even our "enemies". Not just by saying I love this person or that person, but actually have the love of Christ, who died for us while we were yet sinners. - We need to have a humble and open heart both when we read the word and when someone speaks something of God's word to us. - We need to realise that by attacking other brothers and sisters, we attack the body of Christ (As seen with Saul of Tarsus when the Lord said "Why are you persecuting me".) This brought in the unique ministry of Paul concerning the body of Christ. - We need to realise that we are merely vessels. On the one hand, Christ is the treasure within us. We are not to uphold ourselves. On the other hand, it is the enemy who causes division, dissension, dispair, and so on. We cannot attack brothers and sisters but rather pray for them.

Consider those who lived in Jesus' day. They didn't have nicely bound bibles like we have today. We are privaleged to have God's word open, translated and interpreted to us. But we need to realise that the true gospel is Christ Himself, who terminated the flesh on the cross, that we could as Paul said in Gal 2:20 "I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me."

Brothers and sisters, all the word of Christ to dwell in you richly, but not as mere doctrinal knowledge. Superficially speaking, the bible is a manual of rights & wrongs, deeper however, it is God's word and God's heart, deeper still it is Spirit and life to be lived out through us.

The race has been set before us. Though we have divisions among us today in the churches ; whether one is "Catholic" or "Baptist" or whatever. For me, I'm just a child of God, and since denominations didn't exist back in Jesus' day I say that what you "belong" to is irrelevant. God will look into your heart, He will see what kind of faith you have had. Has your living been in fear of God, respect of His word, in all meekness and humbleness ? This is what God is after.

So to close ; Catholic people reading this, though I have "left Catholicism" I consider you just as much my brother or sister in the Lord if you have received Him as your saviour, not just by word but through faith, as much as any other person out there "Baptist", "Presbyterian","Methodist","Anglican". My attitude towards Catholicism used to be very negative but the Lord shined on me to make me realise that I am nothing without Him. The best teaching u can give is a living that is Christ. Putting to death day-by-day your fallen flesh, and living by the divine, incorruptible life of Christ Jesus. If we all did this, Christ would have His bride prepared, waiting for Him. We need to give the Lord reason to come back quickly !

Your brother in Christ, Oliver Fischer

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 27, 2002

Answers

Amen!

-- Tim (tlw97@cox.net), October 27, 2002.

Hi Oliver I am glad you have Christ in your heart, I will be praying for you to sincerely cast aside your fears and doubts and open your heart and conscience to the full truth as held by the Catholic church.

As an aside I was wondering if a few of the heavyweight forum Catholics could help explain what Pope JPII means when he says that unity among the different denominations will only come about when we overcome divisions- "divisions that to a great degree result from the idea that one can have a monopoly on the truth." To me he clearly is saying that the Catholic faith does not have a monolpy on the truth? HELP, Im confused! I dont mean to hijack your thread Oliver.

Blessings

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), October 28, 2002.


"...I consider you just as much my brother or sister in the Lord if you have received Him as your saviour..."

Hi Oliver. My concern, as usual, with the above statement is that as the various denominations disagree in myriad ways with one another, the inevitable next step is to try to find the least common denominator to stake a claim on some form of unity. The latest and greatest LCD is to "accept Jesus Christ as your personal saviour". But this cannot possibly contain the entire body of knowledge and moral direction necessary to attain salvation by the means that God has granted us. I believe that the Catholic Church with its Sacraments and all that it teachings... the whole package... is what Christ intended for us to have. Of course, I would love to see the denominations stop holding the Church at arms length and embrace it as their own.

God bless~

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), October 28, 2002.


Oliver,
Let's assume you did the right thing, rejecting the Catholic Church. It was not your dish; so you went toward the freedom, the escape which is Jesus and only Jesus.

Now you're secure in this feeling of strength and wisdom that you came here to show us struggling Catholics. To be sure, you make the proper disclaimers. --''Though I "left Catholicism" I consider you just as much my brother or sister in the Lord if you have received Him as your Saviour, not just by word but through faith, as much as any other person out there "Baptist", "Presbyterian","Methodist","Anglican".''

Why not admit, the Catholic faith doesn't mean a thing to you? You simply washed your hands of it. That's why you group it together with these others, the Methodists, Anglicans, etc., it's all one mistake to you.

I would say in reply, you are still just as much my brother or sister in the Lord since you left the Church of the Holy Apostles --as any other lost sheep. Just because you have fallen into error is no reason for me to hurt you or feel anger at you. I must love you all the more; you are that poor pilgrim who loses his way on the road to the kingdom.

You'll probably react saying, ''Hold it-- I have Jesus in my heart. He is my personal Saviour, and I'm not a lost sheep. I left the Church, but He wasn't in the Church. I went to Him, not away from Him.''

But you'd be wrong, Oliver. We are the Mystical Body of Christ, His Church. He is our Head; we the members. You go out of His Church and you're free-lancing. Would you show me in the scriptures any mention of free-lance Christians? Ephesians 1, :22 states about Christ: ''And all things He (The Father) made subject under His feet, and Him He gave as Head over all the Church which is indeed His body, the completion of Him who fills all with all.''

This is our Catholic Church, Oliver. You went away from the Head. You wanted to be free, but God Almighty made us all subject to Jesus His Son; not free lancers. We are UNDER Him, as members of that Church.

How is it you disown any membership? You say: '' I'm just a child of God, and since denominations didn't exist back in Jesus' day I say that what you "belong" to is irrelevant.''

Who made you the judge of what's irrelevant? Denominations??? ONE CHURCH is what Christ founded, Oliver; not scattered denominations. One BAPTISM, ONE faith, ONE BODY.

You can't truly believe these are irrelevant. In the world you'll meet division. Not communion; that you meet in the Catholic Church. Only in the Church we call Catholic, Universal. Denominations aren't supposed to exist. Denominations started when men tried to interpret the Word of God independently of Christ's Church; in whom the teachings of His apostles was guarded and revered. Saint Paul says in 1st Corinthians we must always be perfectly united in one mind and one judgment. ''For I have been informed there are strifes among you.'' This was one of the first warnings NOT to become separated from the One Church, following after ''denominations''. Not to turn free- lance, for outside the fold you are always in danger.You can't be perfectly united to the Body of Christ when you go it alone, Oliver. There is no such item as the ''personal Saviour''. We are saved in communion; all with one another. Christ may come to you personally; but He is no one's personal property. This is a myth sold by self-ordained ministers who broke away from the Catholic Church themselves. Don't believe them. You are a Catholic!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), October 28, 2002.


zzz

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), October 28, 2002.


Oh I still meet with saints. Church comes from the Greek word Ecclesia, meaning called out ones. i.e. we are called out from the world. Considering that I have fellowship with the church through brothers and sisters I'd say I'm not a lost sheep. You might not consider them brothers and sisters because they're not "Catholic". Note : It is by Christ's blood that we are saved. Why do you think He said "It is finished." before He gave up His spirit ? It is not by affiliation to the Catholic church.

If you look at the early days of the church as seen in Acts, you'll notice that they broke bread from house to house. That's the way I meet with saints, in someone's home. We break bread, have fellowship, praise Jesus, sing hymns, we all prophesy one by one. This is our enjoyment ; taking Christ as our all in all.

As far as categorizing Catholicism and denominations, basically I feel the divisive system's wrong, on the side of denominations it's the divisions between themselves, though I have noticed they are progressing toward unity which is good, as for Catholicism (this point also applies to the protestantial denominations) I don't think the clergy laity system is what the Lord likes; look up Nicolaitin, it's mentioned in Revelation. Anyway, I'm stressing I don't like the systems. I am more comfortable in a home situation with other saints who don't go by any labels (except Christian) , where everyone has the chance to speak, to function.

I also feel the Catholic doctrine is seriously in error about a great many things, but the fact that there are those who have genuinely received Christ as their saviour is enough for me to consider them my bro or sis. It is by Christ's life that we are one.

Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the life, and noone may come to the Father except through Him. I, as have many other brothers and sisters who are not Catholic, chosen to take Christ Jesus as the unique way to come to the Father.

It's a sad reality to see so many people regard themselves as "it", without realising that they are substituting Christ with their brand of religion, their theology. However accurate you may consider your theology to be, it will never ever replace Christ. Hence why I, while I consider your Catholic doctrines to be in severe error, I still regard u as my brother or sister. Do not forget the Lord's warning not to try to uproot the tares lest u damage the wheat.

Your bro in Christ, Olly.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 28, 2002.


Direct quote of Mother Theresa....

"There is only one God and He is God to all; therefore it is important that everyone is seen as equal before God. Iíve always said we should help a Hindu become a better Hindu, a Muslim become a better Muslim, a Catholic become a better Catholic. We believe our work should be our example to people. We have among us 475 souls - 30 families are Catholics and the rest are all Hindus, Muslims, Sikhsóall different religions. But they all come to our prayers."

Anyone care to comment ? Cos I know this goes right against Catholic, and other Christian doctrine.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 28, 2002.


Oliver,

Here's a link to discussion some of us had in June regarding Mother Teresa. The quote we discussed was roughly the same as what you wrote.

Mother Teresa Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), October 28, 2002.


"There is only one God and He is God to all"

This statement is true. But only this statement. We will all stand before God.

The fact is God isn't contradicitory. So we can say that every religion serves the same God.

-- Tim (tlw97@cox.net), October 28, 2002.


Oliver:
You confess your fault saying ''I am more comfortable in a home situation with other saints who don't go by any labels (except Christian)''. What has faith got to do with your comfort? Is this the language of saints? ''I want to feel comfortable.'' You didn't let Christ ''label'' you, and for that you're feeling good? I am reminded of the ''Rice Christians'' of China, in Sheed's novel.

If they got rice from their Catholic missionary, they accepted Christianity. Without rice, they needed no gospel. With a home situation, you feel you've accepted Christ. In any other situation you're unhappy. Fine Christian.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), October 28, 2002.



I think you've misunderstood what I've said because you have not looked at the intrinsic significance of the matter of the church as portrayed in Acts, in Paul's Epistles and in the book of Revelation. The Lord Jesus says he *hates* the way of the Nicolaitins.

Nico meaning power or victory over and laitin meaning the common people hence the term laity. The clergy laity system annuls the function of the members of the body of Christ and limits the function to a small few.

Paul speaks of His desire that ALL men would prophesy one by one. Not just have someone standing at the front preaching while everyone else just sits, listens, then goes home. Having come out of Catholicism I have seen first hand the deadness, the lukewarmness, the divisiveness of religion. I'm not just speaking about Catholicism, I'm talking about protestential denominations as well.

You may argue all you like that Catholocism is not divisive because they are the one true universal church. The fact stands, there is a common division between the clergy and the laity.

Pledge allegience to the Pope ? What a joke. What do you think Jesus would say if He stood before you while you kiss the ring of the Pope ? It is sad. It is sick. It is a perversion of the gospel of Christ. Note : The entire economy of God has a central line. This central line is Christ - The Complete God and perfect man, who has come as a prototype, to be our everything, our lived out holiness, righteousness, faith, peace, gentleness, forbearance and many many other precious items.

God created man in His image to express Him. Like a glove created in the image of a hand to be filled with the hand. Outwardly it has the same appearance as the hand but inwardly it lacks the reality, the content. This is what God wants to do, gradually dispense Himself into us more and more, that we as the church could become His enlargement, His expression. As such we have been regenerated through baptism, Christ's blood has accomplished our redemption, justification and sanctification, now we are in the process of transformation (as precious stones being built up as a spiritual house, consummated in Revelation) and ultimately brought into glorification. This falls in line with the process that the Lord Jesus went through - Incarnation, Human Living, Crucifixion, Resurrection and Ascension. Although Christ was crucified on the cross, his very incarnation and human living was a daily crucifixion, denying His natural life, living according the will of the Father. Obedient even unto the cross, he as the last Adam crucified all negative things on the cross "It is finished", He declared.

Consider the human body. How pathetic a situation it would be were only some of our members to function, we'd be dead ! This is the sad reality of many churches in Christianity today. All the functioning is left to a select few, what of the "one talenters" ? Should they bury their talent ? What kind of expression is that ? Read the book of Revelation with a prayerful heart and consider the response of the Lord to each of the churches. Look at what He despises and what He admires.

When the day comes that you stand before the Lord, you are going to have to give an account to Him for all that we have done. The Lord's economy does not stop at doctrine, it must peak in our experience and enjoyment of Him. Consider Adam, when he was created, the Lord made no demands apart from not eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. In fact, God brought Adam to the tree of life. Do you know what this means ? God wants us to enjoy Him, experience Him. If we worship the Lord just out of duty, service and obligation then our worship is in vain. Only then can we express Him. The tree of life was God's way of getting His life into man, to fill man with the inward reality that the image lacked. Of course we know that Adam submitted to the will of his wife Eve instead of the authority of God and partook of the fruit of the tree of knowledge. All this resulted in the dreadful fall of man, bringing sin, death and darkness into the whole of creation, which man was ordained to have dominion over. We need to be simple, like children, coming to the Lord with a simple heart, partaking of Him as the tree of life. When we are daily nourished by His word, from milk to solid food, we can be properly constituted to be active, normal healthy functioning members in His body.

If you think you're saved because you're in the "Catholic Church" you have misunderstood God's eternal economy completely. It has nothing to do with pledging allegiance to a human appointed man who has power over all the churches. If you pursue Christ, if you see the excellency of this Christ, If you can appreciate all His unsearchable riches, you will realise that it is absolutely NOTHING of ourselves. Paul said He counted all things to be dung on account of the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus. Without Christ, we are nothing, we have nothing and we can do nothing. Christ is our salvation, Christ is our redemption, Christ is our lived out righteousness. We need to be very humble, as was the Lord, who dined with sinners. When someone is not a Catholic but they believe in and love the Lord Jesus, and you tell them they are doomed to Hell then consider the Lord Jesus. He came as a slave, a lowly man to court us. Had he come in all His divine glory, He would have scared us off. Instead He came in a gentle way that people would come after Him, like in the Song of Songs “Draw me, and we will run after you.” If the Lord draws us, then surely those whom we fellowship will chase after the Lord.

And so, let us not be tempted to think we are more qualified than any others because of our affiliations. Our affiliation is to Christ Jesus. And yes, ALL the believers in Christ are the members of His body, whether you are willing to admit it or not. There are absolutely no verses in the bible, not a single one, that state that if u are not a Catholic, then you will be lost. Salvation comes by faith, which in turn produce works. These works are a manifestation of the divine life of Christ whom we have received. The thief on the cross spoke in faith, and He was saved by faith. The Lord Jesus said to Him "Truly truly I say to you today you shall be with me in paradise." Was this thief a Catholic ? No. Are the nation of Israel Catholic ? No. But the Lord says He will restore the ENTIRE nation of Israel. How will they be saved ? By attending mass ? By partaking of the Eucharist ? By submitting to the Pope ? No. The Israelites were God's chosen people and yet, due to their lack of faith, they were cut off. Ultimately they will be restored as a nation once again when they see the Lord Jesus return they will indeed repent. Hebrews 11:6 tells us "But without faith, it is IMPOSSIBLE to be well pleasing to Him, for He who comes forward to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him."

Pay particular attention to the two words He and Him. Christ is the rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. Faith is Christ Himself inwrought into our being to replace all our anxiety and disbelief. We see that Peter tried to have faith in himself when he told the Lord Jesus that He will follow Him by any means. Later He denied Jesus' name 3 times exactly as the Lord had spoken. This shows that we cannot rely upon ourselves ; Christ who is our all in all is the faith by which we are saved. I think Peter is an example of someone who often tried to go by his own concepts and trusted in himself. The Lord Jesus exposed him to show him that we cannot trust in ourselves or any other man but Christ. Peter, with good intentions told the Lord not to go to the cross, saying this shall by no means happen to him. The Lord Jesus rebuked Peter saying “Get behind me Satan, you are a stumbling block to me, for you are setting your mind on the things of men and not on the things of God.” This verse follows shortly after the famous verse that Catholics claim proves that Peter was the first Pope and the head of the church.

What is Jesus teaching us here ? Peter, only a while ago I revealed to you that I am the Christ, the Son of the Living God, you need to get back to the economy of God, not to your own, fallen human concepts. Jesus revealed to Peter that He was the Christ and that upon this rock He shall build His church. Calling Peter Satan later on, do you think Christ would build His church upon Satan ? Of course Peter in person is not Satan, however our fallen natural man is corrupted by Satan. Our natural life sets it’s mind on the flesh (which is death), but we need to set our mind on the Spirit, this gives life and peace. How can we have such a mind ? We need the mind of Christ to set our mind on the things of God. To have the mind of Christ, we need to crucify our natural life, putting it to death, putting off the old man and putting on the new man. It is in this new created man, the sanctified man, the justified and regenerated man that we can set our minds on the things of God. This is a very serious matter. If we have the mind of Christ, we can have the true building up of the body of Christ, the church.

Peter was also rebuked by Paul as being a hypocrite by the way he acted towards the Gentiles around the Jews. Were the Papal system to be in place back then as it is today, I hardly think Paul would be allowed to get away with rebuking Peter. Paul’s rebuke again shows that we can have absolutely no trust in ourselves, or place trust in anyone other than Christ. He alone lived the perfect sinless life. Not Mary sorry to say. This is evidenced both by the verses which state "All have sinned and all have fallen short of the glory of God." and in the book of Revelation where we see that NOONE but the lamb was found worthy to open the seal. How is it that the bible, which speaks so clearly of Christ and His unsearchable riches and excellence could we be so prone to go off into tangents by revering Mary or the Pope ? Were Mary sinless, then Jesus would NEVER have had to come to accomplish redemption for us because Mary could easily have taken this role. Likewise with Peter, the supposed first pope or any of His so-called successors. The fact is that Christ was the unique one, the only one able to accomplish this because He is both God and man. As in Adam all die, so also all in Christ shall be made alive. Mary and the Pope, before receiving Christ as their saviour (Yes even Mary declared Jesus as her Saviour) before this they belonged to the old creation, to Adam. Hallelujah ! By Christ Jesus we are made new. Ordinances have been dealt with on the cross. Jesus Christ is the reality of the sin offering, the burnt offering, the tresspass offering, the meal offering and the drink offering to be poured out as the cheering wine for redemption and life. Christ is the reality of the bronze serpent, who came in the likeness of flesh but did not have the reality of sin within. Christ is the reality of the manna which supplies and strengthens us in the wilderness. Christ is the reality of the good land flowing with milk and honey, our vast territory to gain and enjoy. Christ is the reality of the ark of Noah, expressed through the church, separating man from the world, unto salvation. Christ is the reality of the sanctification with the children of Israel brought out of Egypt, through the Red Sea. Christ is the reality of the law, being written into man's hearts. Christ is the reality of the ark of testimony, of Gold (divinity) and acasia wood (humanity). Christ is the reality of the tree of life, pouring His life out for man's enjoyment. Christ is the reality of the church, through the oneness with the Father that we may be one. Christ is the reality of Isaac who was offered as a sacrifice through faith. Christ is the reality of Paul, who lived not by his own life but by the life of God. Christ is the reality of the all these things and more. Why do I say all this ? Because the Christian life is Christ Himself lived out of us. Forget outwardness. The things of God are spirituall discerned. Everything is Christ Christ Christ.

Scoff at me if you will, but the pharisees, who considered themselves the top-dogs of scriptural scholar, did not see Christ, they did not know Christ, and they replaced Christ with the law. If I can preach the gospel to someone and tell them that Jesus Christ died for their sins, and was raised from the dead, ascended, and became the life giving spirit for their enjoyment, and these people believe with a pure heart, then they are saved. Once you receive Him you become a child of God, and you do not become disowned. The Lord will never forsake His children, He is the Good Shepherd.

Nothing to do with them having to be a Catholic. When they believe into the Lord Jesus, they receive Him.

Do you even know why we can be saved ? It's because of the divine life of Jesus. This divine life conquered sin and death for us on the cross. Jesus Christ as the last Adam became the life giving Spirit. Now as the Spirit within our human spirit, we can accomplish His eternal economy.

As to the comments about Jesus being the lowest common denominator, yes well that's one way of putting it. Unfortunately there is a great deal of division in the body of Christ, but the ONE thing that unites us is Jesus Christ Himself. He is the way, the reality and the life. Not the pope, not Mary, not a clergy system. His life is a pattern to us.

As to priests, a priest is not someone who outwardly wears a white garment, this is being stuck in the OT. The OT is filled with pictures and types. In the New Testament, we have ALL been brought into a Holy nation and a Royal Priesthood. Christ today is our Holy garment, sanctifying us with his righteousness and holiness. Just as the OT priests function was to offer up sacrifices to God, we as the NT priests of the gospel offer up the gentiles to God for the building up of His church. Therefore my brothers and sisters, you are all priests. Don't believe me ? Read Peter's epistles.

Paul says in the body of Christ there cannot be Jew or Greek, circumcision or uncircumcision, barberian or scythian, slave or free man, but CHRIST is all and in all. Hence, I consider you my brothers and sisters whether you are in Catholicism, Protestantism or simply Christian without any other label. We need one another. Iron sharpens iron. The Lord Jesus wants us all to have a heart for His eternal economy, the New Jerusalem - A shining city of bright luminaries, the believers themselves, as vessels expressing the glory of the Triune God. This is for a testimony to the whole world.

Therefore, if you look beyond Christ, you need to get back on track. Get in line with God's economy. Pray to the Lord that He will shine upon you His good pleasure. Pray for the consummation of the builded up body of Christ.

Why has the Lord not come back yet ? His bride has not been prepared. When we the church are prepared as a beautiful bride, this beauty is simply Christ himself expressed through us. Read the accounts of the gospels to see how beautiful, how excellent this Christ is, read the epistles of Paul to see how unsearchably rich this Christ is. When we have this beautiful Christ expressed in the church, the Lord will have reason to come back. We must hasten His coming. We need to be able to declare like Paul in Galatians 2:20 - I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live but it is Christ who lives in me. Jesus exposed the religionists, he exposed the philosophers, and he exposed the politicians. The Lord Jesus often retreated to a high mountain, away from the crowds, to be with the Father. We need to see that religion is outward, philosophy is fallen and politics are corrupt. On the one hand, the Lord ended all these on the cross, bringing in the new creation, replacing these items with Himself. On the other hand, the Lord will outwardly end them when He comes back. All kingdoms shall fall, but the Lord's Kingdom shall prevail forever and ever.

In the church life today, we can have a foretaste of this kingdom that will be ultimately manifested in the age to come. Through prayer and petition of the saints, and the bountiful supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ we can bind the enemy, loose the will of the Lord to be done on Earth as already in the heavens. May we experience such a blessed participation in the carrying out of God's will, ushering in His kingdom here on this Earth.

The Lord bless you all and preserve you for His economy, Olly.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 29, 2002.


Oliver,

I think Jesus would smile and say "Thank you for respecting my representative on Earth" should I ever have the distinct pleasure of meeting the Pope.

As for the distinction between priest and laity, what about Eph 4:1-16

I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called,

with all lowliness and meekness, with patience, forbearing one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all. But grace was given to each of us according to the measure of Christ's gift. Therefore it is said, "When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men." (In saying, "He ascended," what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower parts of the earth? He who descended is he who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.) And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ; so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every joint with which it is supplied, when each part is working properly, makes bodily growth and upbuilds itself in love.

So St. Paul was saying that there will be those that are called to priesthood, to be our teachers.

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), October 29, 2002.


Each member has a different function but we all serve as priests.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 29, 2002.

Then why did St. Paul say only some will have this calling?

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), October 29, 2002.

You have interpreted the verses according to your own concept. To you, the body of Christ should be just a select few who function.

If everyone functions, but in different ways, does this mean that we no longer have "some are teachers, some are pastors(shepherds), some are evangelists etc.." ? Certainly not. If we have a congregation of people, all of whom function in some way, I can truthfully say "some are teachers, some are shepherds, some are evangelists etc..."

Firstly, Paul desires ALL men to prophesy. He also says each one has a tounge, each one has a teaching let ALL things be done for building up.

The fact is that people these days are just too comfortable sitting back and listening. This is burying your talent just like in the parable of the master and the slaves.

The apostle Paul opened up the unique ministry of the body to us, and likened the body of Christ to the human body, and in this ministry it is absolutely evident that he speaks of all the members functioning together according to the measure and supply of each one part. Some people have a greater measure than others and so can function more, but each one should be functioning for the full expression of the body of Christ. Even if we're just a pinky, we are very important to the body and we have a part to play.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 29, 2002.



As directed, I took a look at the thread concerning the uote regarding Mother Theresa's attitude towards other religions.

I agree with you that Mother Theresa's life should be commended as it was a life of faith. Also as you pointed out, she made her living the gospel, and was not a theologian of sorts.

I could see Steve Jackson's concerns about loving all religions. For me I find that religions that teach against the salvation by faith through grace in Jesus Christ are to be despised. I believe in my heart that God absolutely despises false religions, no matter how much truth there may be in any of them.As Steve pointed out, such religions will all have their end in the lake of fire.

However, in saying that, I agree with the people here that surely Mother Theresa saw above religion and reached out to these people with a living that is of Christ. As such we have no right to condemn her. I can say my living falls far short of what she has accomplished.

I will say this in concluding, that I find it interesting that my comments about the true gospel were refuted by another because of my appealing to a lower common denominator.

I hope that you will examine what I have been writing more closely to find that the whole point of my message was that the gospel should be a living that is Christ Himself. Whether Catholic or Presbyterian, Baptist or non-denom, Jesus will look at what we have been doing all this time on Earth. I can tell u that He will reward us based upon the living we have carried out in response to the faith He has imparted into us. To those who have sound doctrine yet practise lawlessness, the judgement will be much greater than that of one of lesser doctrine but a living of Christ based upon at least what they have received.

He can search what is in our hearts. And when He does this, we had better not rely on a label. Faith has a purpose. Not just for our benefit of salvation, but for God's good pleasure that we would be righteous before Him.

I commend Mother Theresa and any other Catholic who lives a life of Christ as she did. She was a faithful servant of the Lord and deserves rich reward. May we all endeavour to pursue Christ in our living the way she did !

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 29, 2002.


Dear Oliver:
One must admire your chutzpa; but the inordinate length of your posts makes you suspect. You pretended to enter here in a brotherly spirit. But your proselytizing ad infinitum points to more and more attacks on the Catholic Church, which we won't tolerate. --Some subjects in your posts deserve an answer.

Such as: [Are we as Catholics?] ''. . . tempted to think we are more qualified than any others because of our affiliations--? Our affiliation is to Christ Jesus.''

Think: Would I dare say every Catholic gets to heaven because he's in this Church? Of course not. Many Catholics, regrettably fall into unrepentent sin. Just like so many protestants and so many Jews. So; affiliation isn't the Church's aim. It is sanctification of the believer. Knowing this, my response to your preaching is necessarily: ''How many souls do you expect to sanctify in the truth? Especially since you aren't in the truth--!

You state: There are absolutely no verses in the bible, not a single one, that state that if u are not a Catholic, then you will be lost.Reply: Why should there be, if a sad lot of them are sinners who fail to repent?

But the Church strives always to bring her children to repentence and final perseverance. That is her mission in the world.

The Church calls you. You haven't persevered in the faith; you've followed after false prophets and presume on your salvation. By your subversion here of the faith of Catholics, you merit absolutely no mercy from Him; who cannot be deceived. Our faith is in Him, rest assured, Oliver. Not in our ''affiliation''.

Your faith is built on private interpretation of scripture. Since that is scripturally unsound in itself, you build your faith on sand. There is no private interpretation.

Notice I've answered you more succinctly than you've answered us. You haven't even been afforded that grace, My Friend. You are what's called a ''rambler''. Do you stand on streetcorners Sunday afternoons, marching up and down with a bible in one hand and your fist in the air; attracting all the pedestrians and bike- riders? Evangelist my EYE. Lol!!!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), October 29, 2002.


Oliver, You have interpreted the verses according to your own concept. To you, the body of Christ should be just a select few who function.

You're wrong. I believe and wish every human should be in the body of Christ. You stated that our priesthood is against the Bible. I showed you the verses that straightforwardly point out that St. Paul taught that we were to have priests and others with different gifts. It is you who does not take the verse literally and hence you misinterpret it.

I hope that you will examine what I have been writing more closely to find that the whole point of my message was that the gospel should be a living that is Christ Himself. Whether Catholic or Presbyterian, Baptist or non-denom, Jesus will look at what we have been doing all this time on Earth. I can tell u that He will reward us based upon the living we have carried out in response to the faith He has imparted into us. To those who have sound doctrine yet practise lawlessness, the judgement will be much greater than that of one of lesser doctrine but a living of Christ based upon at least what they have received.

I too believe Jesus will judge all of us on how we listened to his teachings. But I also know that Jesus established the Catholic Church and promised the Holy Spirit would be Her guide for all ages. Therefore, it is much better to be within the entire truth and teachings (Catholic Church) rather than with only bits and pieces (Protestant and other Christianity).

God Bless.

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), October 29, 2002.

It's true that "denominations" did not exist in the time of Christ and the Apostles. They only started to exist when people started leaving the Church that He founded. :-)

-- Christine L. (chris_tinelehman@hotmail.com), October 29, 2002.

Dear Eugene,

Thanks for your response, I'll address each part in turn.

"Think: Would I dare say every Catholic gets to heaven because he's in this Church? Of course not. Many Catholics, regrettably fall into unrepentent sin. Just like so many protestants and so many Jews. So; affiliation isn't the Church's aim. It is sanctification of the believer. Knowing this, my response to your preaching is necessarily: ''How many souls do you expect to sanctify in the truth? Especially since you aren't in the truth--!"

It is held as a common doctrine by the Catholic church that one cannot be saved outside the Catholic church. This severely implies affiliationism. Interesting to note that the churches in the bible are simply called "The church in Phillipi, The church in Ephesus, the church in Corinth etc etc etc." No labels here at all. I myself meet in the church in Auckland (New Zealand), that is all we call ourselves.

Regarding to sanctifying souls in the truth. I happen to disagree with you. Of course that's not suprising to you given my standing on Catholicism. The truth I present to people can be pretty much summed up by my previous posts. You can claim that I am preaching a false gospel. You can do that if you want. We could argue til we're blue in the face but I guess God won't be glorified. I present Christ as the embodiment of the Triune God, and the reality of all positive things to be our life within and expression without.

"You state: There are absolutely no verses in the bible, not a single one, that state that if u are not a Catholic, then you will be lost.Reply: Why should there be, if a sad lot of them are sinners who fail to repent?"

Well the Catholic church claims that one must be a Catholic to be saved. If they claim this to be truth, I'd like to see some scriptures to support this claim.

"But the Church strives always to bring her children to repentence and final perseverance. That is her mission in the world."

Of course , we should be like Jesus, the good Shepherd, to care for them, and nourish them in the word. I would have to say though as a Catholic, noone ever seemed to care whether I was there or not. But I guess that happens when u have a clergy laity system.

What are other people's experience ? Is everyone accounted for in the congregation ? The fellowship I have with brothers and sisters, both in the Lord's table and other church meetings is done in the homes like in the book of Acts. This is done currently all over the world.

It is much easier to care for new ones in a home situation because the numbers are fewer, and so we all have a chance to function. When the numbers increase to a large enough level, we form separate fellowship groups in two separate houses out of the previous one.

In this way, more brothers and sisters can be perfected in their function to care for new ones and teach them in the word.

"The Church calls you. You haven't persevered in the faith; you've followed after false prophets and presume on your salvation. By your subversion here of the faith of Catholics, you merit absolutely no mercy from Him; who cannot be deceived. Our faith is in Him, rest assured, Oliver. Not in our ''affiliation''."

Actually you're wrong, it is God who calls us, not the church. It is all up to the mercy and grace of God. Many Catholics are Christened shortly after birth. Sure that might be one way to increase your numbers but it has absolutely no point. If the claim is that Jesus said not to prevent any from coming into the Kingdom then u have a serious problem to consider ; Salvation is based on faith. What if these whom you have Christened do not believe later on ?

What is the point in Christening them when they have no capacity to believe ? Why not wait for them to be old enough to make a proper commitment ? Sprinkling water on their head will do nothing for them as children. Sprinkling water for me did absolutely nothing for me. One must have the calling in his heart to take Christ as his Saviour.

"Your faith is built on private interpretation of scripture. Since that is scripturally unsound in itself, you build your faith on sand. There is no private interpretation"

What faith do christened infants have ? They don't even have the capacity to believe let alone declare their faith. Would u call their faith a faith built on rock ?

My faith comes from Jesus Christ Himself through the Holy Spirit. I believe that He is both God and Man. I have been baptised through immersion in His name. I believe He has died for my sins and that God the Father has raised Him from the dead. I am assured of my salvation. So no I would definately disagree with your claims of my faith being built upon sand. Jesus Christ is the author and perfecter of our faith.

"Notice I've answered you more succinctly than you've answered us. You haven't even been afforded that grace, My Friend. You are what's called a ''rambler''. Do you stand on streetcorners Sunday afternoons, marching up and down with a bible in one hand and your fist in the air; attracting all the pedestrians and bike- riders? Evangelist my EYE. Lol!!! "

I myself do not preach on street corners. I do speak at the Lord's table meeting as do the other brothers and sisters. Regarding the truth, well we see that the Lord Jesus is the truth. We are sanctified in Him as the truth. What are my doctrines ? Well that would take a long time to list them bro, but I do believe I have gained a lot through a rich ministry of the word. For me I don't care so much for outward preaching. Really I'm just a vessel created by God to contain Him. He's the treasure, I'm the vessel. So in nothing of myself do I boast, only Christ Himself. Also if I have not answered you adequately, I do apologise. If you would press me again for the things that you wish to be answered I'll try to do so.

cheers.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 29, 2002.


Friends,
I find one little statement of Oliver's which betrays the superficial nature of his faith. It's shallow and self- serving to believe the following:

''I also feel the Catholic doctrine is seriously in error about a great many things, but the fact that there are those who have genuinely received Christ as their saviour is enough for me to consider them my bro or sis. It is by Christ's life that we are one.''

Here is a confession of his disregard for the Holy Gospel; indifference to truth and to God's Word itself. Oliver may think it is just fine to believe false doctrines and error; as long as you lean on Jesus Christ and forget about the truth. If this were in fact acceptable to Christ, why did He say to His apostles:

''Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; and teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you,'' (Matt, 28:19-20)--???

Oliver says that isn't important. He can tolerate the entrance of error into the Gospel, (he thinks Catholics embrace error) and even so, by trust in Jesus fulfill the commandment. Jesus said ''teach them to observe all that I have commanded.'' NOt a superficial faith and lax or incomplete adherence to His word. But Oliver says that there are those who have genuinely received Christ as their Saviour, even though they have accepted false teachings!

Now, which is it: believe the words of Christ, and know Him in truth, or-- improvise the truth, and simply ''accept Him as a personal Saviour? --Isn't this specious, to dismiss truth in doctrine, and claim Jesus Christ is indifferent? It is; and this is a grave fault in the pretentiousness of our fallen-away Catholic.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), October 29, 2002.


Bro, you should hardly find it suprising that I find the Catholic church to be in error. Just as I am not suprised to find that you think I am completely in error. I would quite like to know which doctrines you find me to be in error over. Perhaps this will help.. ( I expect u to disagree with every single one of these )

* I believe that Christ ALONE is the unique head of His body, the church. * Apart from Christ, all men and women are sinners, including Mary. All have sinned and all have fallen short of the glory of God. * Mary called Jesus HER Saviour (what did she need to be saved from ?) * Believing with my heart that Jesus Christ died for my sins and the God the Father raised from the dead will bring me irrevocable salvation. * I can be saved outside the Catholic church. * Peter was not a Pope. * Baptism means immersing, not sprinkling. * Infant baptism does not save a child. * Faith which in turn produces works saves someone. * God HATES the way of the Nico-laitins. * The assumption of Mary is just that, an assumption. No biblical evidence to support such claims. * The body of Christ consists of all the believers as the outward framework, with the Triune God as the inner essence nd supply. * One cannot pray to Mary for intecession. * Christ is the only way to the Father. * December 25th was not the date of the birth of Christ, but was in fact the day of worship for the Roman god Sol. * Babylon is the name for Rome as evidenced in Peter's Epistle. * Rome is built on 7 Hills. (Check revelation if you wanna know what this is about) * There are 6 Marys in the bible. * Mary had children after Jesus.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 29, 2002.


Yes, Oliver--
You swallowed the whole package. You gave up the true faith for love of a book alone. If we fail to sympathize with your whims, it must be for our lack of Christian charity. You have cornered the market on it; and it gives you a rise to spout the protestant version of salvation by lip service at those of us who truly believe Jesus Christ.

Since you're so charitable and we're so lost, it should please you no end to see the progress you're making in our forum.

Have I got the goods to refute this list of your dissents here poured out? More than enough, Ollie. It takes time, of course. You don't entertain me much, but I'll give it some thought. I have an appointment in about an hour; so I hope you come back later today. I look forward to it.

I hope another poster will give you further proof here meanwhile, of your progress. You are a formidable preacher;

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), October 29, 2002.


Oliver wrote:

"* I believe that Christ ALONE is the unique head of His body, the church. * Apart from Christ, all men and women are sinners, including Mary. All have sinned and all have fallen short of the glory of God. * Mary called Jesus HER Saviour (what did she need to be saved from ?) *"

The fact that Mary needed a Savior doesn't necessarily mean that she sinned! I've been saved by Christ from drugs! But I have never even touched my lips to the butt of a cigarette. Did I need Jesus to be saved from drugs? YES! Have I ever taken drugs? NO!

Mary was saved by the very fact that Jesus Himself chose her to be sinnless at conception.

"Believing with my heart that Jesus Christ died for my sins and the God the Father raised from the dead will bring me irrevocable salvation. * I can be saved outside the Catholic church. * Peter was not a Pope. * Baptism means immersing, not sprinkling.*"

I would love for you to show scriptural proof that Christ was fully submerged. Scripture said "he came up from the water". This could mean that he was under water and came up. But it also could mean that he was standing in water up to his ankles and came up out of the water onto the dry shore! I would also incourage you to think about he early Church, which I hope you don't believe was in error also.

"Infant baptism does not save a child.*"

Christ told several "families" to be baptized. This would include any infants if they had them, and you cannot prove that they didn't have infants. Once again, infant baptism was practiced by the early Church (I think the earliest written document was around the year 300, which indicated that they baptized infants). Do you think that the Catholic Church just made this stuff up?

I would like for you to answer, when is it that you believe the Church started to become corrupt? Then I would ask, when do you think the Church wasn't corrupt? If you can establish for me a date that you believe the Church that Christ founded was correct, I will show you many many Catholic practices (All of them if possible) that date back to that time.

"Faith which in turn produces works saves someone.*

This is a Catholic teaching.

"God HATES the way of the Nico-laitins.*

Hmmm? God HATES?? I don't know Nico-laitins?

"The assumption of Mary is just that, an assumption. No biblical evidence to support such claims.*

There's no Biblical evidance that carrots are orange, but they are? If you can show me Biblically where it states that Mary was not assumed into Heaven, then we are getting somewhere. Elijah was also assumed into heaven, so why can't mary?

The body of Christ consists of all the believers as the outward framework, with the Triune God as the inner essence nd supply.*

This is true - The Body of Christ is the Catholic Church.

"One cannot pray to Mary for intecession.*"

Then one cannot pray to me for intercession, and I likewise would be wrong to ask you for intercession, and Paul was wrong to ask the Chruch for their intercession.

"Christ is the only way to the Father.*"

Catholic teaching!

"December 25th was not the date of the birth of Christ, but was in fact the day of worship for the Roman god Sol.*"

So, please let us know when Christ was born. I'm sure if it was on December 15th you could come up with a coincidental pegan act.

"Babylon is the name for Rome as evidenced in Peter's Epistle.* Rome is built on 7 Hills. (Check revelation if you wanna know what this is about)*"

There is a lot written to discredit this, that I don't want to cut and past from other threads. Please look this up and you will find that it is FALSE!

"There are 6 Marys in the bible.*"

And there probably were 100 more that weren't mentioned in the Bible.

"Mary had children after Jesus."

If so, why is it that Jesus gave Mary to the care of John? Why is it that Mary aked the Angel how it would be - she was engaged to Joseph and if she intended to have relations with him, wouldn't she think it was him who would father her Child?

I'm sure you have quick answers to these questions, but please do some research before you start saying what we already know!

It amazes me how many people come here and start spouting off things like they were the first person to miraculously know. Remember, please, that the Catholic Church has been around for 2000 years. It would be illogical to think that for this time period those zillions of Catholic scholars missed your points. Catholic Monks hand wrote the Bible, and your telling me that they didn't know what they were writing? For 1500 years before the printing press, Catholics had been hand writing Scripture along with the Catholic Traditions and Magesterium, and you're trying to say that they didn't see the errors that you claim between Catholic doctrine and the Scripturs?

We are either right, or we are the stupidest bunch of individuals to every exist.

In Christ.

-- Jake Huether (jake_huether@yahoo.com), October 29, 2002.


"The fact that Mary needed a Savior doesn't necessarily mean that she sinned! I've been saved by Christ from drugs! But I have never even touched my lips to the butt of a cigarette. Did I need Jesus to be saved from drugs? YES! Have I ever taken drugs? NO!"

Of course Mary was a sinner. If she was not, she could have died on the cross for us as a perfect sacrifice. The fact is, as the scriptures say, "All have sinned, all have fallen short of the glory of God." which is why God Himself needed to come as a man to redeem the entire fallen race as the last Adam. This is one of the very doctrines that I find to be utterly perverted by the Catholic church and why I absolutely cannot accept that they have the pure truth.

"I would love for you to show scriptural proof that Christ was fully submerged. Scripture said "he came up from the water". This could mean that he was under water and came up. But it also could mean that he was standing in water up to his ankles and came up out of the water onto the dry shore! I would also incourage you to think about he early Church, which I hope you don't believe was in error also."

The word baptism comes from the greek word baptizmo. The English word never existed until it was put into the English bible translations. The word literally means to immerse. The significance is the burying of our natural, fallen life and rising up in the divine life. I would love to know where sprinkling came from. You yourself admit Jesus was standing in the sea, is there anywhere that shows his baptism was a sprinkling ? Or ANYONE elses ?

"Christ told several "families" to be baptized. This would include any infants if they had them, and you cannot prove that they didn't have infants. Once again, infant baptism was practiced by the early Church (I think the earliest written document was around the year 300, which indicated that they baptized infants). Do you think that the Catholic Church just made this stuff up?"

And you my friend cannot prove that they did have infants. See the problem ? You'll notice also that the order presented in the bible has always been believe and the baptise. The baptism is typified by the Israelites leaving Egypt through the red sea. It is an outward declaration to the church that we have been separated from the world. Again I ask you, what point does infant baptism have later on if the child does not believe ? You cannot force someone into religion. It will not save them. It is faith that saves them.

"I would like for you to answer, when is it that you believe the Church started to become corrupt? Then I would ask, when do you think the Church wasn't corrupt? If you can establish for me a date that you believe the Church that Christ founded was correct, I will show you many many Catholic practices (All of them if possible) that date back to that time."

Indeed still within Paul's time the church became corrupt. This is evidenced in His epistles to the churches in which he addresses the problems of each of the churches at that time. The church itself was established on the day of Pentecost, when the Lord Jesus breathed His Spirit into th disciples and they spoke in toungues. The book of Acts talks particularly about this subject.

"Faith which in turn produces works saves someone.*

This is a Catholic teaching."

Catholicism focuses far too much on works to be saved. Yes works justify us when practiced through faith but they do not save us.

"God HATES the way of the Nico-laitins.*

Hmmm? God HATES?? I don't know Nico-laitins?"

My friend, if you do not know about the Nico-laitins and yet you are so prepared to give a scholarly debate then I advise you to do more homework. Read the book of Revelation.

"The assumption of Mary is just that, an assumption. No biblical evidence to support such claims.*

"There's no Biblical evidance that carrots are orange, but they are? If you can show me Biblically where it states that Mary was not assumed into Heaven, then we are getting somewhere. Elijah was also assumed into heaven, so why can't mary?"

If something is not mentioned in the scriptures, I'm not going to assume it to be true. The Catholic faith is a mixture, bringing in impure teachings mixed with holy teachings. This is likened to the woman in Matthew who took leaven and added it to three measures of meal.

"The body of Christ consists of all the believers as the outward framework, with the Triune God as the inner essence nd supply.*

This is true - The Body of Christ is the Catholic Church. "

Wrong, you see u exclude all believers who don't meet as the Catholic church. The brothers and sisters I meet with, meet exactly as depicted in the book of acts, breaking bread from house to house with simplicity of heart. Are you saying we are not members of Christ's body ?

""One cannot pray to Mary for intecession.*"

Then one cannot pray to me for intercession, and I likewise would be wrong to ask you for intercession, and Paul was wrong to ask the Chruch for their intercession. "

Of course I cannot pray to you ! I can however pray FOR you. This is what the Apostle Paul encouraged the Philippians. He said this will turn out for me to salvation, through your petition and the bountiful supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ. Jesus was absolutely clear that HE alone was the ONLY way to the Father. We cannot pray TO anyone else, we can obviously pray FOR someone else. Do you ever see ANYONE praying to Mary in the scriptures ? Again, this is a corrupt teaching, leaven that has spoilt the pure fine flour. It is absolutely disgusting to see that the Catholic church teaches that our prayers to her help her to soften Jesus' heart to forgive us. Christ came as the one and only Saviour. When the pharasees brought to Jesus the adulterous woman, whom they caught in the very act, they wanted to stone her. Jesus said to them "He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone." This word pierced their hearts and they all left. Jesus said to her "Does no one condemn you ?" and she replied "noone Lord." and Jesus said "Then neither do I condemn you." You see ? Noone had to get Mary to encourage her Son to save this woman from being stoned. He knows our condition. He didn't come to condemn us but to save us. By putting Mary on the level that you do, you in fact pervert the gospels attributing to Christ as the unique Saviour of the world. I never hear of Mary doing ANYTHING in the gospels to save anyone. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Mary-hater or anything like that, I just do not elevate her like you all do. If Mary was one who is needed as a go between then Jesus had absolutely no right to say "I am the way the truth and the life, and noone may come to the Father except through me." , furthermore, Jesus taught us when we pray to the Father, that we do it in HIS name. I know the Catholics rattle off Hail Marys and Our Fathers, the Hail Mary's being way off base and the Our Fathers not even being prayed in Jesus name. Very interesting.

"Christ is the only way to the Father.*"

Catholic teaching! Wrong, Catholics teach us to pray to Mary as well Saints. By the way, saints include all the brothers and sisters in Christ, not just a select few who are canonized by some kind of human tradition.

"So, please let us know when Christ was born. I'm sure if it was on December 15th you could come up with a coincidental pegan act."

We don't know the exact date of Christ's birth, it is not mentioned in the scriptures, but I can tell you that it definately was not December 25th. The Shepherds certainly would not be tending to their flocks at night out in the open field in the middle of a snowy winter.

"Mary had children after Jesus."

If so, why is it that Jesus gave Mary to the care of John? Why is it that Mary aked the Angel how it would be - she was engaged to Joseph and if she intended to have relations with him, wouldn't she think it was him who would father her Child? "

At the cross Jesus says to his earthly mother. “Behold your son and to John behold your mother.” By Jewish law the oldest son is to entrust his mother to the next of kin. He did not entrust her into the hands of his unbelieving brothers, but to John, His closest believer (the disciple Jesus loved).

It is indeed interesting that Joseph wasn't even spoken of in the gospels during these times, so it is quite possible that Joseph was abroad or sick, dying or even dead. Of course we cannot assume such things but it could point to a possibility why Jesus would entrust Mary's life to His brother. I'm not assuming the possibility but I am refuting impossibility.

John 2:17, And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.

Psalms 69:8-9 I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN. For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me.

Could you please explain these two verses to me ? Are they just a waste of words ? Are they applying to someone else. I'd love to hear your explanation.

Galatians 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

The Catholic religion says the word translated "brother" should be "cousin". Wrong again. The word "cousin" is clearly found in the scripture and it means--you've got it--cousin!

Luke 1:36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. Luke 1:58 And her neighbours and her cousins heard how the Lord had shewed great mercy upon her; and they rejoiced with her.

Also interesting to note :

16 And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.

Although the bible itself does not record betrayl by Jesus' parents, it must be agreed upon that this did in fact happen, considering that it is written in the gospel. This would refer to Mary and Joseph (of course Joseph is not the biological Father but they are both referred to as his parents). Therefore, if even his parents betrayed him, I'm not sure in which way, then it shows that they both indeed sinned. Mary sinned, Joseph sinned. Furthermore, It says he will be hated by his - parents, and BRETHEREN and kinsfolk and friends. Notice the order here ? It talks first about those within his family and then those who are even his friends. So on the one hand it prooves that Mary was a sinner and on the other hand it prooves that Jesus had brothers.

"We are either right, or we are the stupidest bunch of individuals to every exist."

I don't consider you stupid at all. We just need a simple heart to the Lord to receive His revelation. I can tell you that what saves you is a pure heart for the Lord, a pure heart that accepts Him as your Saviour. At the end of the day we are all accountable to the Lord for ourselves. I cannot justify you, you cannot justify me. I consider you saved, not lost because you have a heart for Him, as do I.

The children of Israel who were on the Earth as God's unique chosen people thought they knew the scriptures inside out, yet they were the very ones to condemn the Messiah who came to save them. Do not think that you have everything right. God will reveal to you as He has done so throughout history, that we actually know so little of Him.

As you go on in your Christian walk, you will realise that religion, philosophy, tradition are all waste, refuse, loss. It is the unsearchable riches of Christ Jesus that we are to pursue after.

There is no Catholic Church, there is no Baptist Church, no Presbyterian, No methodist, no Jew, no Greek, no slave no freeman. The body of Christ is Christ Himself expressed through all the believers.

The Lord bless and keep you, Olly.



-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 29, 2002.


Olly,

I can't go over all of your points as it would take too long. They are all very easy to refute but I just wanted to point out a couple things that you misunderstand about the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church does NOT teach that one must be a Catholic to be saved. You stated this a few posts earlier. The Catholic Church teaches that everyone who is to be saved will be saved THROUGH the Church Jesus founded, the Catholic Church.

Another thing. When we Catholics pray to Mary and the Saints, we are asking them to talk to Jesus about our wishes. So we do believe that Jesus is the mediator between His Father and us. So it is the exact same thing tha St. Paul did. He asked others to pray for him. We ask Mary and the Saints to pray for us. Before you ask, Yes, we also pray directly to Jesus.

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), October 30, 2002.


Hey Glenn. I know I keep repeating myself myself on this particular point, but...

"The Catholic Church does NOT teach that one must be a Catholic to be saved. You stated this a few posts earlier. The Catholic Church teaches that everyone who is to be saved will be saved THROUGH the Church Jesus founded, the Catholic Church."

Why do people keep saying this?

Perhaps I'm thinking inside the box; as in the Ark.

God bless.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), October 30, 2002.


Emerald,

Please see this thread . About a third of the way down (or maybe nearer 1/2), I ask John for some documentation. He supplied it.

I then went on to read Dominus Jesus and another document which I believe further clarifies my statement.

-- Glenn (glenn@nospam.com), October 30, 2002.


No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church: Papal Teachings

A brief list follows of all the popes and Councils that infallible condemned the implicit faith heresy and infallibly taught the dogma "Outside the Church there is no Salvation" in the exact same sense as their predecessors. They all clearly teach that there are absolutely no exceptions, no exceptions for men who are invincibly ignorant of the Church to be saved.

Pope Clement I, (90-100)

"And we also, having been called through His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves nor by our own wisdom or understanding or piety, nor by the works which we have done in holiness of heart, but through the faith by which Almighty God has justified all men from the beginning." (To the Corinthians, IV:32, The Epistles of St. Clement of Rome)

Athanasian Creed

"Whoever wishes to be save must, above all, keep the Catholic faith: for unless a person keeps this faith whole and entire he will undoubtedly be lost forever... This is the Catholic faith: everyone must believe it, firmly and steadfastly, otherwise he cannot be saved." (D. 39-40) Pope St. Leo the Great, (440-461)

"Upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Mt. 16:18) …These words are the worlds of life and just as they raise up to Heaven those who confess them, so do they plunge down into Hell those who deny them." (Sermon 83, PL54:429; SS vol. III: 267-268)

Pope St. Hormisdas, (514-523)

"The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers." (Book on the Profession of Faith, (D. 171)).

Pope Pelagius II, (579-590)

Pope Pelagius II (A.D. 578 - 590): "Consider the fact that whoever has not been in the peace and unity of the Church cannot have the Lord. ...Although given over to flames and fires, they burn, or, thrown to wild beasts, they lay down their lives, there will not be (for them) that crown of faith but the punishment of faithlessness. ...Such a one can be slain, he cannot be crowned. ... [If] slain outside the Church, he cannot attain the rewards of the Church." (D. 246-247)

Pope St. Gregory the Great, (590-604)

Pope Saint Gregory the Great (A.D. 590 - 604): "Now the holy Church universal proclaims that God cannot be truly worshipped saving within herself, asserting that all they that are without her shall never be saved." (Moralia)

Pope Adrain II, (867-872)

"The first requirement of salvation is to keep to the standard of the true faith." (ACTIO I, (D. 171, n.1, quoting the Rule of Pope St. Hormisdas, IV Constantinople)

Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, (1215)

Pope Innocent III (A.D. 1198 - 1216): "With our hearts we believe and with our lips we confess but one Church, not that of the heretics, but the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside which we believe that no one is saved." (D. 423)

Pope Boniface VIII, (1294-1303)

Pope Boniface VIII, in Unam Sanctum, 1302:

"With Faith urging us we are forced to believe and to hold the one, holy, Catholic Church and that, apostolic, and we firmly believe and simply confess this (Church) outside which there is no salvation nor remission of sin, the Spouse in the Canticle proclaiming: "One is my dove, my perfect one. One she is of her mother, the chosen of her that bore her" [Cant. 6:8]. Certainly Noe had one ark at the time of the flood, prefiguring one Church which perfect on one cubit had one ruler and guide, namely Noe, outside which we read all living things on the earth were destroyed... .This is that "seamless tunic" of the Lord [John 19:23], which was not cut, but came forth by chance. Therefore, of the one and only Church (there is) one body, one head, not two heads as a monster, namely, Christ and Peter, the Vicar of Christ and the successor of Peter, the Lord Himself saying to Peter: "Feed my sheep" [John 21:17]. He said "My," and generally, not individually these or those, through which it is understood that He entrusted to Peter and his successors, of necessity let them confess that they are not of the sheep of Christ, since the Lord says in John, "to be one flock and one Shepherd" [John 10:16]."

Pope Clement VI, (1342-1352)

"Not one man of those traveling outside the faith of the Church and outside obedience to the Pontiff of the Romans can finally be saved … All those who set themselves up against the faith of the Roman Church and who die in final impenitence will be damned and descend into the perpetual torments of Hell." (Super Quibusdam, D. 570 b, 1)

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, (1445)

Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1441: "The most Holy Roman Catholic Church firmly believes, professes, and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church."

Council of Trent, (1563) Pope Gregory XIII, (1572-1585)

"No one can be saved outside this true Catholic faith." (Profession of Faith, D. 1085, D. 1000

Pope Benedict XIV, (1740-1758)

"No one can be saved without the faith of the Catholic Church." (Nuper Ad Nos, D. 1473)

Pope Leo XII, (1823-1829)

Pope Leo XII (A.D. 1823 - 1829): "We profess that there is no salvation outside the Church. ...For the Church is the pillar and ground of the truth. With reference to those words Augustine says: `If any man be outside the Church he will be excluded from the number of sons, and will not have God for Father since he has not the Church for mother.'" (Encyclical, Ubi Primum)

Pope Pius VIII, (1829-1830)

"It will be especially fitting to remember this firm dogma of our religion: that outside the true Catholic faith no one can be saved." (cf. Recollections of the Last Four Popes, Cardinal Nicholas Wiseman, London: 1858)

Pope Gregory XVI, (1831-1846)

Pope Gregory XVI (A.D. 1831 - 1846): "It is not possible to worship God truly except in Her; all who are outside Her will not be saved." (Encyclical, Summo Jugiter)

Pope Pius IX (A.D. 1846 - 1878)

"It must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood." (Denzinger 1647)

Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadem, 1854

"Not without sorrow we have learned that another error, no less destructive, has taken possession of some parts of the Catholic world, and had taken up its abode in the souls of many Catholics who think that one should have good hope of eternal salvation of all those who have never lived in the true Church of Christ. Therefore they are wont to ask very often what will be the lot and condition after death of those who have not submitted in any way to the Catholic faith, and by bringing forward most vain reasons, they make a response favorable to their false opinion. …For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood. …Truths of this sort should be deeply fixed in the minds of the faithful, lest they be corrupted by false doctrines, whose object is to foster an indifference toward religion, which we see spreading widely and growing strong for the destruction of souls."

Pope Leo XIII, (1878-1903)

"Those who acknowledge Christ must acknowledge Him completely and entirely. The Head is the only-begotten Son of God; the Body is His Church. All who dissent from the Scriptures concerning Christ are not in the Church, and all who agree with the Scriptures concerning the Head but who do not communicate in the unity of the Church are not in the Church. They can in no way be counted among the children of God unless they take Jesus Christ as their Brother and, at the same time, the Church as their Mother …Consequently, all who wish to reach salvation outside the Church are mistaken as to the way and are engaged in a futile effort… Christianity is, in fact incarnate in the Catholic Church; it is identified with that perfect and spiritual society which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and has for its visible head the Roman Pontiff …This is Our last lesson to you: receive it, engrave it upon your minds, all of you: by God’s commandment salvation is to be found nowhere but in the Church." (Annum Ingressi Sumus, Papal Teachings of the Church 652-653; Tametsi, PTC 647)

Pope Saint Pius X (A.D. 1903 - 1914)

"It is our duty to recall to everyone great and small, as the Holy Pontiff Gregory did in ages past, the absolute necessity which is ours, to have recourse to this Church to effect our eternal salvation." (Encyclical, Jucunda Sane) "

Pope Benedict XV, (1914 – 1922)

"Such is the nature of the Catholic faith that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole, or as a whole rejected: This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved." (Encyclical, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum)

Pope Pius XI (A.D. 1922 - 1939)

"The Catholic Church alone is keeping the true worship. This is the font of truth, this is the house of faith, this is the temple of God; if any man enter not here, or if any man go forth from it, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. ...Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ, no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors." (Encyclical, Mortalium Animos)



-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 30, 2002.


Okey dokey. Here it is!

“Of course Mary was a sinner. If she was not, she could have died on the cross for us as a perfect sacrifice.”

Jesus did not die on the cross as a “perfect sacrifice” simply because he didn’t sin. Jesus was God, and therefore, perfect in every way! Mary, though sinless, was not perfect. Sin and perfection are two things. Furthermore, to fulfill what the OT had said, the Son (male) of David would be the one. Mary was neither male, nor was she related to David. Matt. 1: “16 Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, (9) who is called the Messiah.”

“The fact is, as the scriptures say, "All have sinned, all have fallen short of the glory of God." which is why God Himself needed to come as a man to redeem the entire fallen race as the last Adam. This is one of the very doctrines that I find to be utterly perverted by the Catholic church and why I absolutely cannot accept that they have the pure truth.”

I will simply give you this SITE to refer to. There is much written on this which you would benefit from.

“The word baptism comes from the greek word baptizmo. The English word never existed until it was put into the English bible translations. The word literally means to immerse. The significance is the burying of our natural, fallen life and rising up in the divine life. I would love to know where sprinkling came from. You yourself admit Jesus was standing in the sea, is there anywhere that shows his baptism was a sprinkling ? Or ANYONE elses ? “

There is no proof either way. But you would agree that Baptism is symbolic of our “burying of our natural, fallen life…”. Therefore, since Baptism is symbolic, why would one need literally to be submerged?

And at the risk of leading us to another “questionable” Catholic doctrine, I would like to ask: If your church is so adamant about taking Baptism (by submersion) literally, then why is it that you do not take the words of Christ, John Ch. 6: “unless you eat my body and drink my blood you have no life in you”, literally? If one is literal and the other is figurative, please show me how you or on what basis you were taught to distinguish one from the other.

“"Christ told several "families" to be baptized. This would include any infants if they had them, and you cannot prove that they didn't have infants. Once again, infant baptism was practiced by the early Church (I think the earliest written document was around the year 300, which indicated that they baptized infants). Do you think that the Catholic Church just made this stuff up?"

And you my friend cannot prove that they did have infants. See the problem ? You'll notice also that the order presented in the bible has always been believe and the baptise. The baptism is typified by the Israelites leaving Egypt through the red sea. It is an outward declaration to the church that we have been separated from the world.”

To this I would refer you to the Old Testament “Baptism” which was circumcision. You will note that ALL those elders who were to become a part of God’s covenant had to profess belief first and then be circumcised. But you will agree that the Law was for the INFANT to be circumcised 8 days after birth! How could an day old profess belief. So you see that it was the Parents belief for the infant, which allowed the infant to be a part of God’s people.

“Again I ask you, what point does infant baptism have later on if the child does not believe ? You cannot force someone into religion. It will not save them. It is faith that saves them.”

What point did circumcision have for the House of David, many of whom did evil in the sight of the Lord!? What point does Baptism have on one who says they believe, but really do not? What point did Baptism have for Judas? In conformance with your last statement, Baptism then really means nothing! Because even a professed believer can become an unbeliever at which point if he/she continues in their evil path may not be saved though they had been Baptized. Baptism isn’t a guarantee that the individual will be saved! Baptism is a symbol of one’s dying to death and rising to life in the Body of Christ– which even an infant has a right to. Jesus said, “Let the children come to me, for it is the Kingdom of Heaven that belongs to them”. Since it is the Kingdom that belongs to them, who are we to deny them that very symbol which mysteriously brings them into the Body of Christ?

Furthermore, the Catholic Church has another Sacrament which as its name suggests Confirms the person in their belief. This Confirmation is a likening to Pentecost when the Apostles, who had been Baptized, where then confirmed in the Holy Spirit.

"I would like for you to answer, when is it that you believe the Church started to become corrupt? Then I would ask, when do you think the Church wasn't corrupt? If you can establish for me a date that you believe the Church that Christ founded was correct, I will show you many many Catholic practices (All of them if possible) that date back to that time."

Indeed still within Paul's time the church became corrupt. This is evidenced in His epistles to the churches in which he addresses the problems of each of the churches at that time. The church itself was established on the day of Pentecost, when the Lord Jesus breathed His Spirit into th disciples and they spoke in toungues. The book of Acts talks particularly about this subject.

The Lords Church never became corrupt! Jesus said that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. It was the individuals in the Church that Paul wrote to. There was only One Church at the time, and it was the Catholic Church! It was the individuals inside the Church who began to corrupt. If it were the Church that became corrupt, then how is it that in only a matter of a few decades the Church that Christ founded would corrupt, yet you believe that the church you belong to is not corrupt?

“"Faith which in turn produces works saves someone.*

This is a Catholic teaching." Catholicism focuses far too much on works to be saved. Yes works justify us when practiced through faith but they do not save us.”

How is it that you can tell us what Catholicism focuses on, when you are not a Catholic? I, as a Catholic, can tell you that we DO NOT focus on works as a means for salvation. Rather, we focus on works as and indication of one’s faith. We focus on Faith accompanied by good works as an indication of one’s salvation. For no one can tell the other they’ve been saved. Only God knows. Works are all we have to focus on as an indication of faith. Works are the fruit of faith. Can you judge someone’s faith if it is not accompanied by good works?

“ My friend, if you do not know about the Nico-laitins and yet you are so prepared to give a scholarly debate then I advise you to do more homework. Read the book of Revelation.”

I have read the Book of Revelations and I falter in finding the connection between the Nico-laitins and Catholics. Can you elaborate on your theory? I have done much homework, and I’m confident that if you do likewise you will find that there is much written about Revelations, which is in conformance with the Catholic Faith.

“"There's no Biblical evidance that carrots are orange, but they are? If you can show me Biblically where it states that Mary was not assumed into Heaven, then we are getting somewhere. Elijah was also assumed into heaven, so why can't mary?"

If something is not mentioned in the scriptures, I'm not going to assume it to be true. The Catholic faith is a mixture, bringing in impure teachings mixed with holy teachings. This is likened to the woman in Matthew who took leaven and added it to three measures of meal.”

The latter verse you referred to can also be used against all the Protestant theologies. I would appreciate a list of the “impure teachings” that you are referring to. And the fact that one cannot assume something to be true if it is not scriptural is just plain ignorant. If the Holy Spirit can preserve a perishable Book for hundreds of years, then why is it you fail to believe that the Holy Spirit can preserve oral Tradition?

“"The body of Christ consists of all the believers as the outward framework, with the Triune God as the inner essence nd supply.*

This is true - The Body of Christ is the Catholic Church. "

Wrong, you see u exclude all believers who don't meet as the Catholic church. The brothers and sisters I meet with, meet exactly as depicted in the book of acts, breaking bread from house to house with simplicity of heart. Are you saying we are not members of Christ's body ?”

I did not exclude all believers who don’t meet as the Catholic Church. Several Popes have written on this subject: Salvation outside the Church.

One can meet exactly as depicted in the book of Acts, yet fail to meet exactly as the Apostles did. This is a fact that the book of Acts wasn’t written as an expanded manual for how to meet to serve God. We Catholics likewise meet exactly as depicted in the book of acts, breaking bread from house to house with simplicity of heart. But we meet with the fullness of the Church not expressed completely in Acts. And the bread we break is the Body of Christ, which was given up for us!

“""One cannot pray to Mary for intecession.*"

Then one cannot pray to me for intercession, and I likewise would be wrong to ask you for intercession, and Paul was wrong to ask the Chruch for their intercession. "

Of course I cannot pray to you ! I can however pray FOR you.”

This is a simple confusion of words. To pray means to ask. So we ask Mary to ask Jesus (i.e. We pray to Mary to pray for us). In the same way when I ASK you to pray for me, what I am doing is PRAYING to you to pray for me. We NEVER pray to Mary to grant us our petition, like we do to Jesus. Mary is NOT God. The Catholic Church knows this! I will say it again, Mary is NOT God. Nor do we elevate her anywhere near God. Mary is just like you and I, human, yet without sin. WE DO NOT PRAY TO HER LIKE ONE PRAYS TO GOD. We simply ask Mary to pray (intercede) for us.

“This is what the Apostle Paul encouraged the Philippians. He said this will turn out for me to salvation, through your petition and the bountiful supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ. Jesus was absolutely clear that HE alone was the ONLY way to the Father. We cannot pray TO anyone else, we can obviously pray FOR someone else. Do you ever see ANYONE praying to Mary in the scriptures ?”

In the definition of prayer, YES. If Mary was amongst the Churches to which Paul wrote, then Paul asked (prayed) her to pray for him.

“Again, this is a corrupt teaching, leaven that has spoilt the pure fine flour.”

The “fine flour” , which is your church? Or is it one of the 30,000 Protestant churches?

“It is absolutely disgusting to see that the Catholic church teaches that our prayers to her help her to soften Jesus' heart to forgive us.”

Then it was likewise sickening that Moses could “soften” Gods heart against his people. Several times did the Israelites go to Moses and ASK (PRAY) that he would Pray for them to God. If Moses could calm God’s wrath against the Israelites, then I’d be willing to bet that Mary, the Mother of Jesus, could calm his wrath against us.

“Christ came as the one and only Saviour. When the pharasees brought to Jesus the adulterous woman, whom they caught in the very act, they wanted to stone her. Jesus said to them "He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone." This word pierced their hearts and they all left. Jesus said to her "Does no one condemn you ?" and she replied "noone Lord." and Jesus said "Then neither do I condemn you." You see ? Noone had to get Mary to encourage her Son to save this woman from being stoned.”

But as the circumstances permitted, Mary might not have been around. This one incident doesn’t set precedents for intercession.

“He knows our condition. He didn't come to condemn us but to save us. By putting Mary on the level that you do, you in fact pervert the gospels attributing to Christ as the unique Saviour of the world.”

What level is this? She certainly is above you! Because Jesus said, even the least in heaven is greater than the greatest on earth! We don’t, however, liken her to God, as you seem to presume falsely.

“ I never hear of Mary doing ANYTHING in the gospels to save anyone.”

Ehem! You didn’t hear that she gave birth to Jesus. I’d say that was a pretty big THING in the gospel. Not to mention she raised Jesus and was at his side for 33 years!

““ Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Mary-hater or anything like that, I just do not elevate her like you all do. If Mary was one who is needed as a go between then Jesus had absolutely no right to say "I am the way the truth and the life, and noone may come to the Father except through me."…”

The Church doesn’t teach that we NEED Mary as a “go between”! She is an optional intercessor, much like you or I.

“… , furthermore, Jesus taught us when we pray to the Father, that we do it in HIS name. I know the Catholics rattle off Hail Marys and Our Fathers, the Hail Mary's being way off base and the Our Fathers not even being prayed in Jesus name. Very interesting.”

I’m trying to keep up with your train of thoughts here. Can you elaborate on how specifically the Hail Mary is “way off base” seeing as thought it is Scriptural. And also tell us how we should pray the Our Father “in Jesus name”, as we surely do not according to you. “"Christ is the only way to the Father.*"

Catholic teaching! Wrong, Catholics teach us to pray to Mary as well Saints. By the way, saints include all the brothers and sisters in Christ, not just a select few who are canonized by some kind of human tradition.”

You, a non-Catholic, are telling me, a Catholic, that I’m wrong about a Catholic teaching? Catholics do not teach us to pray to Mary! And the fact that you think so is indicative of your complete lack of comprehension or understanding of Catholic teachings. I am tempted to stop writing and instead tell you to take a Catechism class. Because at this rate, I’m not sure that you have any correct knowledge of the Catholic Faith. And we know that “saints include all the brothers and sisters in Christ…” . Saints are not canonized because they weren’t saints to begin with. Saints that have portrayed exquisite love for God and a closeness to the Lord that is admirable are canonized “Saints” for the level of sanctity and holiness that one should always seek to imitate.

“"So, please let us know when Christ was born. I'm sure if it was on December 15th you could come up with a coincidental pegan act."

We don't know the exact date of Christ's birth, it is not mentioned in the scriptures, but I can tell you that it definately was not December 25th. The Shepherds certainly would not be tending to their flocks at night out in the open field in the middle of a snowy winter. “

That was my point, as you seemed to have missed. Since we DO NOT know the actual birth date of our Lord, we picked December 25th to celebrate. Do you not celebrate the Holy and Most Sacred Birth of our Redeemer? If so, please let us know on which day, so that we may be corrected. Or do you not celebrate it at all for fear that the date you pick might unintentionally fall on a pegan holiday?

“"Mary had children after Jesus."

If so, why is it that Jesus gave Mary to the care of John? Why is it that Mary aked the Angel how it would be - she was engaged to Joseph and if she intended to have relations with him, wouldn't she think it was him who would father her Child? "

At the cross Jesus says to his earthly mother. “Behold your son and to John behold your mother.” By Jewish law the oldest son is to entrust his mother to the next of kin. He did not entrust her into the hands of his unbelieving brothers, but to John, His closest believer (the disciple Jesus loved).”

Let me understand this: Jesus, who would perfectly fulfill the Law had other blood brothers who didn’t believe, and so he gave Mary to the care of John, who was a believer, but wasn’t a blood brother. Was John, “the son of Zebedee”, even related?

“It is indeed interesting that Joseph wasn't even spoken of in the gospels during these times, so it is quite possible that Joseph was abroad or sick, dying or even dead. Of course we cannot assume such things but it could point to a possibility why Jesus would entrust Mary's life to His brother. I'm not assuming the possibility but I am refuting impossibility.”

But that is just it! John wasn’t Jesus’ brother!

“John 2:17, And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.

Psalms 69:8-9 I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto MY MOTHER'S CHILDREN. For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up; and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me.

Could you please explain these two verses to me ? Are they just a waste of words ? Are they applying to someone else. I'd love to hear your explanation.”

They are not a waste of words, but they are taken out of context. Are you trying to use this to show that Jesus had brothers? If so, this was not a passage about Jesus’ genealogy, but rather a statement about the kingdom of God and His House! Much can be said about this, but I would rather have you research it on your own. Because words I speak of it might be turned around, but words of others are of others.

“Galatians 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.”

We see from Matthews Gospel that James was the son of Zebedee and brother of John. How is it that Jesus was also the son of Zebedee? Brother, then, means something other then blood brother.

“The Catholic religion says the word translated "brother" should be "cousin". Wrong again. The word "cousin" is clearly found in the scripture and it means--you've got it--cousin!

Luke 1:36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. Luke 1:58 And her neighbours and her cousins heard how the Lord had shewed great mercy upon her; and they rejoiced with her.”

Yes, you are right, at certain times brother means brother and cousin means cousin. But it all depends on who wrote it, or should I say, translated it. Jesus spoke Aramaic, and in this language there is no distinction. But the Bible was written in Greek and Hebrew and a few other dialects early on. If you were a scholar of the Languages, you’d not the subtle differences. I’m not claiming to be, but I’ve read the literature which backs this up.

“Also interesting to note :

16 And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.

Although the bible itself does not record betrayl by Jesus' parents, it must be agreed upon that this did in fact happen, considering that it is written in the gospel. This would refer to Mary and Joseph (of course Joseph is not the biological Father but they are both referred to as his parents). Therefore, if even his parents betrayed him, I'm not sure in which way, then it shows that they both indeed sinned. Mary sinned, Joseph sinned. Furthermore, It says he will be hated by his - parents, and BRETHEREN and kinsfolk and friends. Notice the order here ? It talks first about those within his family and then those who are even his friends. So on the one hand it prooves that Mary was a sinner and on the other hand it prooves that Jesus had brothers.

Not so. Was this written about Jesus or was this Jesus talking to his Apostles? In Luke 21:16 Jesus is saying this about his disciples not about himself! And because he was talking to the Apostles he could include “parents, and relatives” without referring to his own parents. In any case, it is also written, “Anyone who obeys my Father in heaven is my brother, sister, and mother!” And in is written that Jesus was the Son of David – but he wasn’t really his son! Therefore, we are to understand this to mean relatives and close (Matthew 12:50)

“"We are either right, or we are the stupidest bunch of individuals to every exist."

I don't consider you stupid at all. We just need a simple heart to the Lord to receive His revelation. I can tell you that what saves you is a pure heart for the Lord, a pure heart that accepts Him as your Saviour. At the end of the day we are all accountable to the Lord for ourselves. I cannot justify you, you cannot justify me. I consider you saved, not lost because you have a heart for Him, as do I.

The children of Israel who were on the Earth as God's unique chosen people thought they knew the scriptures inside out, yet they were the very ones to condemn the Messiah who came to save them. Do not think that you have everything right. God will reveal to you as He has done so throughout history, that we actually know so little of Him.

As you go on in your Christian walk, you will realise that religion, philosophy, tradition are all waste, refuse, loss. It is the unsearchable riches of Christ Jesus that we are to pursue after.

There is no Catholic Church, there is no Baptist Church, no Presbyterian, No methodist, no Jew, no Greek, no slave no freeman. The body of Christ is Christ Himself expressed through all the believers.”

Then how is it written that Christ said to Peter, “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my CHURCH”. Which Church was he referring to. Since all churches believe different things, which one is correct. I pose to you the unchangeable truth that the Catholic Church is that very Church Christ built on Peter.

In Christ.

-- Jake Huether (jake_huether@yahoo.com), October 30, 2002.


Dear Oliver:
It would be unfair and senseless to say you aren't a devout man. A God-fearing and goodhearted man. The world needs more good men like you. Not more Bible Christians, more Catholics like you.

It may well be God's grace which brings you here; and the benefit of these discussions may, I hope, bring you back to the Church. I realise you'll scoff at this.

Up a ways you stated, ''If I can preach the gospel to someone and tell them that Jesus Christ died for their sins, and was raised from the dead, ascended, and became the life giving spirit for their enjoyment, and these people believe with a pure heart, then they are saved. Once you receive Him you become a child of God, and you do not become disowned. The Lord will never forsake His children, He is the Good Shepherd. ---

Nothing to do with them having to be a Catholic. When they believe in the Lord Jesus, they receive Him.''

I can leave out for the time being some other disastrous things you've said you believe. If we look just at this above statement, and dwell on it, your good heart may appreciate what I want you to realise. --First; ''If I can preach the gospel to someone and tell them that Jesus Christ died for their sins, and was raised from the dead, ascended, and became the life giving spirit for their enjoyment, and these people believe with a pure heart, then they are saved.''

He isn't a ''spirit, or enjoyed'', but skip this aspect of your theology. More important is, the Catholic faith is always clear, Jesus is just as you say here, the One who has died, is risen, ascended, and reigns at the right hand of the Father. It's part of the Creed. I've had anti-Catholics say to me, ''Creeds can't save you, Jesus saves you!'' I hope you can see how foolish it is to argue over this, the Creed is simply what YOU said right here; and we are called to believe that. So, you are quoting from the Apostle's Creed. (Surprise!)

It isn't up to YOU, Oliver, to ''preach'' any of the Creed. The Church has been preaching it with apostolic authority since before even Pentecost (Acts, 1 :8- 14). You depart in the next step. Just after that, you fall into error. You say: ''Believe with a pure heart, then they are saved. Once you receive Him you become a child of God, and you do not become disowned.''

Christ said, ''Go therefore and make disciples of all nations baptizing . . . 20. -- teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.''

In the last chapter of Mark, Christ is even more demanding, but the message is clear always. Perseverance in faith --believe-- is a requirement. Baptism is a requirement.

You have to hear the word; and by faith enter into His grace in holy baptism. Then you are a child of God; but still bound by conscience not to sin. If you die unrepentent of a grave sin, you are damned. Saint Paul says: ''Therefore, brethren (believers) we are debtors not to the flesh , that we should live according to the flesh; for if you live according to the flesh you will die,'' and, ''I marvel you are so quickly deserting him who called you to the grace of Christ,'' (Gal, 1:6) and ''Or do you not know that the unjust will not possess the kingdom of God?'' (1 cor, 6:9) all to repeat the words of Jesus in Revelations. ''As you sow shall you reap.''

Nothing to do with being a Catholic? The Catholic faith is the very source of the teachings you claim to believe. With some glaring exceptions, the distorting of many biblical truths, out of invincible ignorance. But you can still correct them. As to ''receiving Jesus'' directly on believing, this is the common understanding of all ''born again'' non-Catholics. It isn't at all the method of receiving He gave us in His Church. It's one which self-ordained ministers have promoted in our society ad infinitum, the last 3 centuries. A teaching of men.

Far be it from me to dispute who has or hasn't succeeded in being saved this way; God knows. I just find it self-serving and credulous of you all; ''No down payment, no obligation, just believe He is the Saviour, you don't spend a thing on this sure- fire investment! How can you turn down such a deal?'' The only thing required is lip service.

And what is it the Church of the apostles asks of you? Come all and ask His mercy; repent our sins and sin no more; worship the Father Almighty through His Son in union with one another; PRAY. Offer prayer and supplication up for one another, do penance and alms-giving. Live a life of self-denial and seek God's grace in this life. He lives amidst His people, in the holy tabernacle. Approach Him with confidence and offer Him all your love! This is the call of the Church to her children.

And how are we to know this is truly His Church, not lost or failed down the centuries, but alive and serving Him? Look for the sign of Peter. Where Peter is, the Church is. --Where the Church is, there is Jesus until the end of time.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), October 30, 2002.


Hey Glenn; I read that piece by Colin Donovan of EWTN a while ago (the one that John referred to) and while he seemed to do well on other questions, I think that Donovan did a real poor job on the one that was quoted.

But even so, for the sake of argument, lets say that all Donovan says is the dead on accurate truth... still, I still believe that people abuse the notion and extend the envelope of salvation far, far beyond anything intended or indicated by the Church. This would seem to me to lead to an attitude that people are fine where they are. But those things at rest tend to remain at rest; yet our desire is to bring them into the fullness of the Faith.

As you might notice from Oliver's long last post, the Protestants are not impressed by this; they are well aware of the issue and of what in practice seems to be over-liberalizing and a departure from doctrine.

Feeney died in communion with the Church, but was never asked to recant anything. It is unclear to me to this day what it was brought him back into favor with the Church. I have written to some people who have written articles about Feeney asking what it was that he had recanted in order to reenter into communion with the Church, and they wrote back saying they didn't know.

I don't know everything there is to know about Feeney, and Feeney is not the source, or the originator, of my musings regarding extra ecclesiam nulla salus. The original source of the beginnings of my musings about this issue pretty much stem from watching people, in person, take an apologetic stance about being Catholic... trying to make people understand that 'Catholics are Christians too', as if we needed assert our inclusion into a wider circle of Christianity. I'm watching all these things and thinking "What is UP with that? Why the sheepishness? We are the one true Church. Let's make it known, carefully and charitably, but boldly."

Actually, this isn't even about Feeney to me at all, it is about the dangers of taking an existing stance of the Church on an item and creating a huge bubble so much larger than the narrow path Christ described.

I'm not accusing you of that Glenn, just laying out for you some of my thinking and the origin of the question itself in my mind. I'm not an EWTN junkie; we don't get it here except in the middle of the night... my wife watches it when the baby gets up in the nighttime. As beneficial as EWTN may be, I personally wouldn't take them as being the last word on anything, though I'm sure they general pretty trustworthy.

God Bless

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), October 30, 2002.


Very interesting to see that noone seems to have anything to say about what the pope's have said regarding salvation and the Catholic church. Very interesting indeed. Well take your time to go over each of the Popes' speakings.

Well anyway, for my part, I'll address each of the points mentioned. I'll enclose everyone else's texts in asterisks cos things are getting quite lengthy now.

*************************************** Jesus did not die on the cross as a “perfect sacrifice” simply because he didn’t sin. Jesus was God, and therefore, perfect in every way! Mary, though sinless, was not perfect. Sin and perfection are two things. Furthermore, to fulfill what the OT had said, the Son (male) of David would be the one. Mary was neither male, nor was she related to David. Matt. 1: “16 Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, (9) who is called the Messiah.” ***********************************

Point me to one single verse in the bible that shows that Mary never sinned. I have already shown you verses. To refresh your memory -

Romans 9:23 - "All have sinned, and all have fallen short of the glory of God."

Rom. 5:12 - "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that F18 all have sinned."

And yes I had a look at that link you pointed me to, questioning the meaning of the word translated as all, and citing Enoch who was raptured, as an example. Actually, this is a weakly constructed argument at best. The fact that Enoch was raptured cannot and will not help you in this argument. You yourselves have sinned, and yet you expect to be raptured if u don't die first, correct ? Well here these are both examples of those who have sinned and yet escape death. Now, why is your argument weak ? Because of the term In Adam. We see that Enoch was "walking with God". This is a type of being found In Christ. Actually Christ is God, so the fact that Enoch was walking with God, shows he was walking with Christ. This is being in Christ. One cannot walk with God if they are walking according to their natural fallen human life. To walk with God, one needs to deny His natural life, hence Jesus said "If anyone wants to come after me, let Him deny himself, take up his cross and follow me." Enoch wasn't just raptured for any reason. God's word is teaching us something here. The OT uses a lot of typology, get used to it. Hence we have the following verse : 1 Cor 15:22: "As in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive". It is a hope and encouragement to us saints who await the rapture.

We must however realise that even though Enoch did walk with God, He most certainly would have sinned before hand, this is an inevitable result of being joined to Adam. We actually see that Christ Himself BECAME sin on our behalf.

On that website you gave me the link to I read the following statement from the web-author : "What would be irrefutable would be a verse that read something like: "absolutely every human being who ever lived no exceptions - has sinned......" "

Of course you are not going to find a verse that is written exactly the way you have written, that's ridiculous, but I managed to dig up this verse easily enough : "There is none that doeth good, no not one." - Romans 3:12

This verse is absolutely clear. NONE doeth good, no NOT ONE !!!! Do you need anything clearer than that or are you going to twist that one also ?

Now this is God's speaking, so He would obviously not refer to Himself.

The problem is the Catholic faith do not realise the significance of Jesus' death on the cross. It was in that act of complete and perfect sacrifice on behalf of sinners that the old creation, Adam had been terminated.

Until that point, the old creation had not yet been dealt with. However, Catholic teaching would have us believe that Mary was preserved especially by God to be sinless before the sin offering had taken place. You need to thoroughly understand all the types presented to us in the OT. If you do not understand these types, you cannot appreciate what I am telling you. The principle given to us especially in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers, is that a sin offering MUST be made in order for man to be blameless. And do you know what ? I have a proof that Mary made a sin offering. Do you know what sin Mary committed ? I bet this has got your attention now. You might in fact be suprised to know that it was in fact a sin to conceive a firstborn male. Are you suprised ? Take a look at this :

And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord; (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;) And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons. - LUKE 2:22-24

Now let us look at what it says in the book of Leviticus...

Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean. - LEVITICUS 12:2

And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest: Who shall offer it before the LORD, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female. And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean. - LEVITICUS 12:6-8

Take a good read. If you missed it, go over it again. What kind of offerings did Mary present ? Two types actually, a burnt offering and a sin offering.

But wait a minute ! How can it be a sin to conceive a firstborn male-child ? Actually, if you're asking this question, you haven't understood the significance of what I mentioned earlier. Jesus became a sin on our behalf. Mary sinned, and Jesus Himself was the sin. Btw, don't be offended at my saying that Jesus was the sin. Pauls epistle to the Corinthians confirms exactly this.

"God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." (2 Corinthians 5:21)

So while Jesus Himself never sinned (Mary did to bring Him fourth), He became sin for us. I think this verse from 2nd corinthians is one of the most precious verses in the entire bible, as it shows God's masterful handiwork to turn sin into our righteousness. How much of a shame is that to Satan !!

Do you marvel at God's economy ? When I used to read leviticus, I used to wonder why are there all these different types of offerings ? We can really see that there is more to God's plan than we initially think.

And we can see also that Christ Himself is called the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. The lamb was by God's ordination the animal of choice to make expiation for sins.

Romans 8:3,4 - For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

If Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh, where did this sinful flesh come from ? We have the incorruptible Spirit of God who went into Mary. Surely the sinful flesh came not from the Holy Spirit.

The sinful flesh obviously came from the one who was still joined to the old creation of Adam, Mary. You see, either you are in the old creation or in the new creation, there is no in-between. While Catholics might like to believe you can have a bit of sin here and no sin there, it is absolutely unscriptural. You see, the bible is very clear concerning Jesus Christ becoming a sin. He did not prevent the Father's will from being carried out, had He done so, He would not have accomplished our redemption. Christ fully bore our sin and received the Father's judgement. Christ died for Mary's sins and all of fallen Adam. That is why He was termed as the last Adam. He effectively ended the old creation.

So, as Firstborn over all creation, He became Firstborn from among the dead, and through His resurrection, bringing many sons back into glory with Him, He became Firstborn among many brothers.

Isn't God's eternal economy so unsearchable rich and wonderful ?

When we take a look at the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception as stated in the Catholic Encyclopedia, it states :

". . .was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin. . ." The formal active essence of original sin was not removed from her soul, as it is removed from others by baptism; it was excluded, it never was in her soul. Simultaneously with the exclusion of sin. The state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam -- from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death.

Do you believe this or do you believe that Mary made a sin offering ? One of these is stated explicitly in the bible and the other is not. I leave it up to you to choose.

*********************************************** There is no proof either way. But you would agree that Baptism is symbolic of our “burying of our natural, fallen life…”. Therefore, since Baptism is symbolic, why would one need literally to be submerged? ***********************************************

No proof either way ? Ok let's see, what different types of water baptism are practised in Christianity ? There's 3 I can think of - Sprinkling, Pouring, and Immersion. Does one go down into the water to be sprinkled or poured ? Does one come up out of the water after being sprinkled or poured ? Let us suppose you perform a sprinkling in your church. How does one go down into the water ? How does one come up out of the water ? Also for pouring, how can this be achieved? Please don't use the argument about going down doesn't mean fully going into the water. What are you going to do just stand in the water ? Is standing-in-water baptism practised in any churches ? Read your Catholic doctine, even u should know that the Catholic church allows 3 types of baptisms - sprinkling, pouring, and immersion. If you are having doubts about immersion, then you might like to tell His Holiness the Pope that you want Him to remove the doctrine.

Given that baptsim by immersion is shown several times in the bible, but not even 1 instance of pouring or sprinkling, it is up to u to tell me what basis it has.

"Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins"

Now why on Earth would all these people come to the Jordan river to be sprinkled ? or poured ? Can you imagine how it would look ? All these people coming to this massive river, all queuing up and then just have some water sprinkled on them ? Notice also in this verse it actually explains what takes place in the baptism - these people were confessing their sins. I wonder if an infant can do that.

**************************************************** To this I would refer you to the Old Testament “Baptism” which was circumcision. You will note that ALL those elders who were to become a part of God’s covenant had to profess belief first and then be circumcised. But you will agree that the Law was for the INFANT to be circumcised 8 days after birth! How could an day old profess belief. So you see that it was the Parents belief for the infant, which allowed the infant to be a part of God’s people. ****************************************************

Circumcision is completely different because it's not now a case of the parent WANTING to be a part of God's people. They ALREADY WERE God's people, and as such, they were bound by God's laws and ordinances, one of which was the circumcision. Now we are in the age of grace, the ordinances have been abolished, there is no circumcision or uncircumsion. Jesus however gives clear instruction that one must be baptised of water and spirit to enter into the Kingdom of the Heavens. But what is this age of grace all about ? Well, superficially speaking we are freed from the law, more intrisically we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. It is with the faith of each individual that they take this step to publically declare their belief in Jesus Christ to be allowed entrance into the Kingdom of the Heavens.

***************************************** What point did circumcision have for the House of David, many of whom did evil in the sight of the Lord!? What point does Baptism have on one who says they believe, but really do not? What point did Baptism have for Judas? In conformance with your last statement, Baptism then really means nothing! Because even a professed believer can become an unbeliever at which point if he/she continues in their evil path may not be saved though they had been Baptized. Baptism isn’t a guarantee that the individual will be saved! Baptism is a symbol of one’s dying to death and rising to life in the Body of Christ– which even an infant has a right to. Jesus said, “Let the children come to me, for it is the Kingdom of Heaven that belongs to them”. Since it is the Kingdom that belongs to them, who are we to deny them that very symbol which mysteriously brings them into the Body of Christ? ***********************************************

What point did circumcision have ? The point was that if you were one of God's chosen people, and you were under the law, you were bound by that law. They couldn't just decide to do what they like, e.g. commit adultery, they'd be stoned ! The children of Israel were already ordained by God through His covenant with Abraham. You ask who are we to deny them. Actually, to say this is pointless. Salvation does not come without faith. If you baptise one and there is no faith, then it is fruitless. Also, by bringing in people to the church who are not genuine believers you are just like the one who planted tares among the wheat. And we know what will happen to the tares, they will be burnt like chaff. The bible is very clear concerning this. Just like paying people to be baptised into the church would be equally wrong. You might have a large number, but you'll end up with tares in amongst the wheat. Regarding your comments about Judas, actually you will find that God actually ordained that He betray Jesus. I am not going to be one who judges what the final destiny is of Judas, it's not my place to do so. What point does Baptism have ? Baptism is a testimony to the church that one repents and declares their belief in Jesus as their Saviour. In this way, the other believers can have fellowship with them, for what fellowship does light have with darkness ? Of course, there'll always be those who never really do believe and yet get baptised. Of these people, the baptism is of no effect because they are obviously not born again. We cannot prevent this from happening, only the Lord knows who all the wheat are and who all the tares are. For us, we are commanded not to uproot the tares lest we perhaps damage the wheat.

*********************************************** Furthermore, the Catholic Church has another Sacrament which as its name suggests Confirms the person in their belief. This Confirmation is a likening to Pentecost when the Apostles, who had been Baptized, where then confirmed in the Holy Spirit. ***********************************************

The day of Pentecost must have been a glorious day indeed ! How I would have loved to see the 120 saints pray together in one accord. It certainly woulda been something ! 8-) The thing is that on this day, indeed they had the pouring of the Holy Spirit and began to speak in many tounges, but this was merely a continuation of their ongoing faith. However, the principle shown in the bible is that once you are saved, you are eternally saved. Why is this ? It is because Christ is the good Shepherd. If a sheep does wander, He leaves the 99 behind and searches, and doesn't stop until it is found. Therefore if one is lost in the coming age, they were never saved to begin with. God knows from beginning to end who is saved and who is lost, He doesn't make mistakes.

********************************************** The Lords Church never became corrupt! Jesus said that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. It was the individuals in the Church that Paul wrote to. There was only One Church at the time, and it was the Catholic Church! It was the individuals inside the Church who began to corrupt. If it were the Church that became corrupt, then how is it that in only a matter of a few decades the Church that Christ founded would corrupt, yet you believe that the church you belong to is not corrupt? ********************************************

It is a commonly known fact that the churches became corrupt. Would you deny that the selling of indulgences ever took place ? Would you deny that there were ever any bad popes ? Even if we don't want to admit any such things, let us take a look at the conditions of churches that the Apostle Paul wrote to:

Galatians 1:6-7 -

6 I marvel that you are so quickly removing from Him who has called you in the grace of Christ to a different gospel,

7 Which is not another gospel, only there are some who troule you and desire to pevert the gospel of Christ.

1 Corinthians 1:10-14

10 Now I beseech you, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing and that there be no divisions among you, but that you speak the same thing and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be attuned in the same mind and in the same opinion. 11 For it has been made clear to me concerning you, my brothers, by those of the household of Chloe, that there are strifes among you. 12 Now I mean this, that each of you says, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ. 13 Is Christ divided ? Was Paul crucified for you ? Or were you baptized into the name of Paul ? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius.

1 Corinthians 3:3 For you are still fleshly. For if there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly and do you not walk according to the manner of man ?

1 Corinthians 4:6-8

6 Now these things brothers, I have transferred in figure to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us the matter of not going beyond what has been written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one, against the other.

7 For who distinguishes you ? And what do you have that you did not receive ? And if you receive it, why do you boast as though not having received it ?

8 Already you are filled; already you have become rich; you have reigned without us. And I would have it indeed that you did reign that we also might reign with you.

1 Corinthians 5:1 It is actually reported that there is fornication among you, and such fornication that does not even occur among the Gentiles, that someone has his stepmother.

1 Corinthians 5:6 Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump ?

1 Corinthians 6:7 Already then it is altogether a defeat to you that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged ? Why not rather be defrauded ?

I think this should be enough evidence to show u that the church did indeed become corrupt. There is of course more but do I really need to exhaust something already so plain to see ?

Also, I myself never claimed "my church" as u put it (actually the whole church is Christ's) was incorruptible. It has indeed made many mistakes, as has been the case throughout Christianity. You asked me when did the early church ever become corrupt, and I have provided you with proof. You on the other hand, as do other Catholics, try to convince me that the Catholic church is the one and only true expression of the body of Christ, and that we should all be subject to the Pope whom you hold to be infallible. That my friend is exclusivism and is entirely contrary to the gospels of Christ.

********************************************************* How is it that you can tell us what Catholicism focuses on, when you are not a Catholic? I, as a Catholic, can tell you that we DO NOT focus on works as a means for salvation. Rather, we focus on works as and indication of one’s faith. We focus on Faith accompanied by good works as an indication of one’s salvation. For no one can tell the other they’ve been saved. Only God knows. Works are all we have to focus on as an indication of faith. Works are the fruit of faith. Can you judge someone’s faith if it is not accompanied by good works? *********************************************************

Perhaps you did not read the first line of this thread. That's ok I won't hold it against u 8-) Now as for salvation by works, I already mentioned the quotes from various Popes regarding salvation only within the Catholic Church. What else can we find ?

"We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff." Pope Boniface VIII

" therefore it is fitting that Divine Wisdom should provide means of salvation for men in the form of certain corporeal and sensible signs which are called sacraments." - Catholic Encyclopedia

************************************************ I have read the Book of Revelations and I falter in finding the connection between the Nico-laitins and Catholics. Can you elaborate on your theory? I have done much homework, and I’m confident that if you do likewise you will find that there is much written about Revelations, which is in conformance with the Catholic Faith. ************************************************

Nico = Victory above/over laitins = common people. Study the words yourself with a Greek dictionary.Clergy-laity system. Catholicism is not alone on this, denominations are just as guilty. God said He hates the works and ways of the Nico-Laitins. Why ? Because they annull the function of the members of the Body of Christ. The Lord hates it when we don't exercise the talents He has given to us. If we bury our talent, then the Lord is not going to be pleased. He is expecting a profit from each of us. Note, this is not regarding salvation by any means, but it illustrates the ecological problem prevalent in both Catholicism and Protestential Denominationalism. Without the functioning of all the members, Christ's body cannot be built up properly. Yes some are teachers, some are evangelists, some are Sherpherds, what is the purpose ? That we can build up one another. Paul says each one has a teaching, each one has a psalm, a tounge. He says he desires ALL men to prophesy, one by one, instead of having a small number of ppl taking care of all the functioning while the rest just sit there as pew warmers. Do you know the Lord hates lukewarmness ? This was his rebuke to the church in Laodicia as seen in Revelation. We all need to be burning in spirit, serving the Lord.

"The latter verse you referred to can also be used against all the Protestant theologies. I would appreciate a list of the “impure teachings” that you are referring to. And the fact that one cannot assume something to be true if it is not scriptural is just plain ignorant. If the Holy Spirit can preserve a perishable Book for hundreds of years, then why is it you fail to believe that the Holy Spirit can preserve oral Tradition?"

I believe God's intended way of presenting His word was through the bible. Let us see what Paul has to say in 1 Corinthians 4:6

6 Now these things brothers, I have transferred in figure to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us the matter of not going beyond what has been written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one, against the other.

The Catholic faith as one user put it, is evolving. Bits are always being added to it according to what the Pope has to say at the time. Then going by what the Pope says, it in turn becomes the true doctrine of the church. This goes right against 4:6 The Pope can say whatever He wants and Catholics will bow their heads and just say Amen. They accept man's traditions to a pervertedly high level. You think traditions of men are to be trusted ?

"neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men." (Mark 7:8)

"and why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?" (Matthew 15:3)

"thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that." (Mark 7:13)

"Beware that no one carries you off as spoil through his philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ." - Colossians 2:8

I base my faith upon God's word in the bible than traditions of men, or speaking of a human elected Pontiff. What more do I need than the bible, and the Holy Spirit to guide me in His word ?

"You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free." - John 8:32

I know that I am saved. I know that Jesus saved me. I know that I need not submit to the Pope to be saved, I know that I need not practise the sacriments to be saved. Christ died for me that I could live not by my fallen, corrupt life, but by the divine life which empowers me to do all things. **************************************************** I did not exclude all believers who don’t meet as the Catholic Church. Several Popes have written on this subject: Salvation outside the Church. ****************************************************

Read the quotes from popes I have pasted. Would u tell me that some popes disagree with those popes ? Surely not ! Surely the Vicar of Christ in his great holiness and infallibility could not err. Surely the one to whom all Catholics are to be subject couldn't teach them a false teaching, could they ?

******************************************************* This is a simple confusion of words. To pray means to ask. So we ask Mary to ask Jesus (i.e. We pray to Mary to pray for us). In the same way when I ASK you to pray for me, what I am doing is PRAYING to you to pray for me. We NEVER pray to Mary to grant us our petition, like we do to Jesus. Mary is NOT God. The Catholic Church knows this! I will say it again, Mary is NOT God. Nor do we elevate her anywhere near God. Mary is just like you and I, human, yet without sin. WE DO NOT PRAY TO HER LIKE ONE PRAYS TO GOD. We simply ask Mary to pray (intercede) for us. *******************************************************

There certainly is a simple confusion in words, and you will find nowhere, absolutely nowhere in the bible where anyone prays TO anyone but God. You think you can pray to me ? Go right ahead 8-) I'm waiting for ya 8-) I can pray FOR you, you can pray FOR me. I cannot pray TO you, you cannot pray TO me. Simple as that.

*********************************************** In the definition of prayer, YES. If Mary was amongst the Churches to which Paul wrote, then Paul asked (prayed) her to pray for him. ***********************************************

Isn't it funny how Mary's name is never mentioned in any of Paul's Epistles ? Also in His greetings to the church, He never declares a greeting to Peter. Peter was in fact rebuked by Paul for His hypocrisy. Do you think that were Peter really to be the first Pope, Paul would rebuke the Vicar of Christ ? So many claims made by the Catholic Church for supremacy, so little substance in their proofs.

As for Peter being called a rock, so what, He told us "You yourselves also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house into a holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." So Peter was called a rock ? So are we ! If that makes Peter a Pope then I guess we're all Popes. How quaint. Absurd isn't it ? Yet this is what the Papacy is built on. *************************************************** The “fine flour” , which is your church? *************************************************** Fine flour is pure teaching. It comes only by the Holy Spirit through the word of God.

**************************************************** Then it was likewise sickening that Moses could “soften” Gods heart against his people. Several times did the Israelites go to Moses and ASK (PRAY) that he would Pray for them to God. If Moses could calm God’s wrath against the Israelites, then I’d be willing to bet that Mary, the Mother of Jesus, could calm his wrath against us. ****************************************************

In Moses time, the Israelites were subject to the law. As such, full salvation through Jesus Christ had not come yet. Moses spoke according to the promise Jehovah promised His people that He would multiply their seed. Jehovah could not go against His word, that would make Him a liar. So here it was perfectly acceptable for Moses to speak this truth to Jehovah. In the case of Jesus Christ, He has already fulfilled the role of salvation and redemption, hence why He stated on the cross "It is finished." I want you to ponder those words - it is finished. That means His work was complete to accomplish redemption for God's people. To pray to Mary to act as one who will cause our Saviour to be more merciful is an abomination to say the least. That's to say Jesus has not fulfilled His role to as a Saviour to an adequate degree. In taking such a position, you completely miss the knowledge surpassing love of Christ. Again, when the adulterous woman was brought to Jesus, He did not condemn her. He knew the words to speak to the Pharasees to pierce their hearts. Don't think the Lord Jesus isn't merciful enough.

Hebrews 4:15 - For we do not have a High Priest who cannot e touched with the feeling of our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all respects like us, yet without sin.

***************************************************** What level is this? She certainly is above you! Because Jesus said, even the least in heaven is greater than the greatest on earth! We don’t, however, liken her to God, as you seem to presume falsely. *****************************************************

Ephesians 2:6 - And raised us up together with Hin and seated us together with Him in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus.

Thus, we who are in Christ Jesus, are greater than those not in Christ Jesus. Why ? Because it is Christ in us who is the treasure within us earthen vessels.

****************************************************** Ehem! You didn’t hear that she gave birth to Jesus. I’d say that was a pretty big THING in the gospel. Not to mention she raised Jesus and was at his side for 33 years ******************************************************

This was the writer's response to my statement that I never see anything in the bible about Mary saving anyone. There is absolutely no saving anyone by Mary in this either. Raising up the Saviour as an earthly mother does, and being at his side does not make HER save anybody. Mary saved NOONE.

**************************************************** I’m trying to keep up with your train of thoughts here. Can you elaborate on how specifically the Hail Mary is “way off base” seeing as thought it is Scriptural. And also tell us how we should pray the Our Father “in Jesus name”, as we surely do not according to you. “"Christ is the only way to the Father.*" ****************************************************

Mary is not God. This prayer you pray to her is a worshipping and glorifying prayer. It's like if I was to pray "Hail Mother Theresa, you are blessed and pure and holy,you are so wonderful..." Did you ever see Jesus EVER pray to ANYONE but the Father ? Again, lack of biblical evidence shows up again. Why does this always happen with Catholic doctrines ? It is because you follow man's traditions, which are warned against.

********************************************************* That was my point, as you seemed to have missed. Since we DO NOT know the actual birth date of our Lord, we picked December 25th to celebrate. Do you not celebrate the Holy and Most Sacred Birth of our Redeemer? If so, please let us know on which day, so that we may be corrected. Or do you not celebrate it at all for fear that the date you pick might unintentionally fall on a pegan holiday?

***************************************************** The fact is we're celebrating the birth of Jesus on a day that's not His day. Furthermore Christmas has become an utterly commercialised holiday and is more about kids getting presents. Easter has turned into a chocolate fiesta. Why marry ourselves to the world ? What fellowship does light have with darkness ? These things are an abomination to our dear Lord. Again, it is a tradition of men. The Lord doesn't like it, so we also should not like it.

***************************************************** Not so. Was this written about Jesus or was this Jesus talking to his Apostles? In Luke 21:16 Jesus is saying this about his disciples not about himself! And because he was talking to the Apostles he could include “parents, and relatives” without referring to his own parents. In any case, it is also written, “Anyone who obeys my Father in heaven is my brother, sister, and mother!” And in is written that Jesus was the Son of David – but he wasn’t really his son! Therefore, we are to understand this to mean relatives and close (Matthew 12:50)

*****************************************************

I'm glad you brought up this verse because if you look at the verses directly before it, it can be shown, without excuse, that Jesus' family are spoken of. Let's take a look...

12:46 While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.

which bretheren are these being referred to ? It definately cannot be referring to all the disciples there as the "Bretheren" cos they're covered a few verses

12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.

Cousins ? You really really wanna hold this to mean cousins ? Let's see how it would sound...

12:48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?

Who is my mother ? and who are my cousins ? You really think so ? 8-) Of course I don't blame u, you're devout Catholics, you couldn't possibly allow it to mean brothers. That would crumble so many of the doctrines you hold to be true.

12:49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

Behold my mother and my cousins ! Sorry, I don't buy it. 8-)

12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

******************************************************** Then how is it written that Christ said to Peter, “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my CHURCH”. Which Church was he referring to. Since all churches believe different things, which one is correct. I pose to you the unchangeable truth that the Catholic Church is that very Church Christ built on Peter ***********************************************************

Again, the word church comes from the Greek word ekklesia meaning called out ones. There were no names for the churches mentioned in the bible, the all were just called the church in Philedelphia, the church in Corinth etc. As for the church being built on Peter, I have already addressed this above.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 31, 2002.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ