Pope suggested that those who do not believe in Catholic teachings should leave the church rather than become betrayers like Judas.
Pope Benedict XVI delivered an address from the Vatican on Sunday in which he suggested that those who disagree with Catholic teachings or do not believe in Jesus Christ should leave the church rather than become betrayers like Judas.
“Judas,” Pope Benedict said, “could have left, as many of the disciples did; indeed, he would have left if he were honest. Instead he remained with Jesus. He did not remain because of faith, or because of love, but with the secret intention of taking vengeance on the Master.”
The leader of the Worldwide Roman Catholic Church added that Judas’ most serious crime was falsehood, which the pope described as “the mark of the devil.” He added that Catholics needed to always be sincere like St. Peter and believe in Jesus.
LifeSiteNews reported that Monsignor Ignacio Barreiro, the Human Life International Rome Director, confirmed that the pope’s comments are very much related to the Catholic Church’s formal teachings in support of traditional marriage and pro-life views.
“For those Catholics who cannot bring themselves to believe the formal teachings of the Church on life and family matters it would be more honest to leave the Church rather than betraying Her,” Barreiro said.
“We regret very much that the person is so inclined and we wish they would have a conversion to truly believe,” he added.
Source: Christian Post
My comment:
This is the remarkable statement by the Pope, and we need to carefully decode this message.
All who are outside of the Church, who believe in Jesus, but disagree with the Pope: Who are they?
The Vatican II called them separated brethren.
But if you are inside the Roman Catholic Church, but disagree with the Pope, than you are a Judas?
So the conclusion is: You better keep quite and obey, or you will one find day go and hang your self.
Matthew 27:5
So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.
The truth is hard to face for Roman Catholics. Those who remains in the Roman Catholic Church, betray Jesus of the Bible. They serve an antichrist, who demands their absolute loyalty to faulty, corrupt and not biblical doctrines. For the sake of “peace” within the family.
This is a message from a cult. You better look for the exit before it is too late.
Written by Ivar
ivarfjeld.com 
Shalom brother.
After my exodus from the RCC I was actually called Judas by my catholic friends. How amazing is it that the RCC finds common bonds with Islam and Buddhists, anyone within who disagrees is condemed and anathema. If you truly accept Yeshua alone you will not be able to stay within catholicIsm.
This message hits a little too close to home for me. A dear friend – who left RCC & then shared the gospel to me which allowed me to exit RCC, 2 – was called Judas by her dear catholic friend. So wrong!
RCC says u r a Judas if u don’t believe in her, the Mother Church. The great goddess Mother Church! THAT is NOT the gospel message. Repent & believe in Jesus as Savior is the gospel message. ‘Mother Church’ does not save! Jesus saves!
Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.” (John 6:29
NIV). No where does it say: believe in the church & you will be saved.
Kay
Just like Satan he (the Pope) twisted The Word of God >>>>The leader of the Worldwide Roman Catholic Church added that Judas’ most serious crime was falsehood, which the pope described as “the mark of the devil.<<<
The Pope said Judas' most serious crime was 'falsehood'…Jesus said it 'was' betraying HIM'
Jesus said..
"Luke 22:22 And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!
There is nothing wrong with what the Pope said. In fact, what he is saying is the plain truth. This is the way to deal with any heretics who want to remain in the Church. If you don’t agree then its best you leave for you are not listening to the Church :
“And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he
will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the
heathen and publican.”
(Matthew 18:17-18)
God be with you all.
Your Pope ‘said’ that Judas MOST SERIOUS CRIME was falsehood….<~~tell a LIE
FALSE-HOOD…
1. a false statement; lie. <~~LIE
2. something false; an untrue idea, belief, etc.: The Nazis propagated the falsehood of racial superiority.
3. the act of lying or making false statements.
4. lack of conformity to truth or fact.
5. Obsolete . deception.
Jesus said ….about what Judas did was "Luke 22:22 And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!
THAT MEANS….it was not 'just a lie' or a false-statement'….but it was would be worse for that man (Judas) for betraying the Son of Man….
BETRAYAL….
1. a. To give aid or information to an enemy of; commit treason against: betray one's country.
1. to deliver or expose to an enemy by treachery or disloyalty: Benedict Arnold betrayed his country.
2. to be unfaithful in guarding, maintaining, or fulfilling: to betray a trust.
3. to disappoint the hopes or expectations of; be disloyal to: to betray one's friends.
4. to reveal or disclose in violation of confidence: to betray a secret.
You see dear Judas did not lie about Jesus, (he did not tell 'a little falsehood or a big one falsehood)…Judas 'told WHO AND WHERE JESUS WAS so they could capture Him and kill Him!
Satan does not 'tell falsehoods'…he flat out LIES….Satan entered into Judas and after Judas did his dastardly deed in BETRAYING THE LORD…he left Judas and Judas felt so bad of what he had done he 'committed suicide'!! Surely you can see that the Pope rewrote The Word of God 'just like Satan does…he take 'part of the Scripture and twists it to make it mean 'less' than God says it does…
If you can't see this Truth I am so terribly sorry for you for your time is always spent in defending The Catholic Church and the Pope and his lies, and negating all that The Lord God Almighty has, is and will continue to tell the World the Truth in all things! Please open your eyes before it is too late.
Andrea
Judas’ falsehood was in his false companionship/discipleship of the Lord. Now we can proceed :
Your reading of the Pope’s words is incorrectly. You see Judas’ falsehood encompasses his betrayal of the Lord. Through his falsehood he culminated in betraying the Lord. Hence the Falsehood was Judas’ most serious crime for through his falsehood he committed the worst act one could do… To Betray the Son of God. So it would have been better that he was not even born (As Jesus said).
Wandile, there has been countless gold nuggets given to you to help you to see the Truth and realize you are following a pawn of Satan. I tell you of a truth your stir Great Fear in me for your Eternal Destiny and all because your love and faithfulness are misplaced. In anything, anybody for any reason would be tolerated within the High Council of God, but what the Catholic Church has and is doing contrary to His Holy Word is not excusable. Your only recourse is to Flee this belief and turn to Jesus Christ defend Him, His work, His death, burial, resurrection His redemptive work in the Children of God. But from all that you have been given here, and your determination to deny and reject it, yet they continue to toss out more and more truth to you. It is a FACT you don’t want what is freely shared and given to you, you’re only here to spew out more of the praises of The Enemies of The Cross of Jesus Christ. And His Blood that was shed for you and for all that are also equally chosen to believe a lie! My hat goes off to the ones who have tried so hard to share so much of what The Holy Spirit has given them to you, and you have not seen even one Angel to keep one word they have said about Jesus to fall to the ground that you easily reject as one would swat a fly of annoyance!
Everything the pope said IS WRONG! It is not a betrayal to anyone if a RC does not agree with doctrine, if one remains in this false religion created by Satan to make people share praise and worship to “saints” and Mary. If Satan cannot receive worship, then he will take the worship and praise from GOD ALMIGHTY. Any RC saying rosaries, kneeling in front of statues, praying for the dead in purgatory are commiting IDOLATRY, plain and simple. Pope Benny should have said that all RC that remain in the RCC are betrayers of Jesus and God the Father. I am an ex-catholic, I was baptized nearly 2 yrs ago to wash off the black stain from my RC infant baptism. Catholics this is your chance to save your soul, RUN, RUN AS FAR AS YOU CAN FROM THIS EVIL RELIGION! Pope JP2 does not have “holy blood”. Aliens are demons/fallen angels, Pope Benny said it was ok to believe in them and he would baptize them if they want to be baptized. Jesus said, CALL NO MAN YOUR FATHER, RC have been calling priests “father” and the pope, “holy father”. Jesus also said, “DON’T YOU KNOW WHAT GOES INTO THE BELLY COMES OUT IN THE DRAUGHT (expelled of waste), transubstantiation is a LIE! The spirit of Jesus DOES NOT enter into the wafers (death cookies). Visit my YouTube channel if you want to know more of what the bible says (TRUTH), proving the RCC doctrine is ANTICHRIST. You are a Judas if you stay in this WHORE OF BABYLON church, Read Rev 17, this is the Vatican description, you will be damned if you do not COME OUT OF HER, as it is written! If you believe God created the heavens and the earth as it is written in Genesis, then you must leave. Pope Benny openly said that Genesis is an allegory of creation, all things were created in the “big bang” which God created and all things “evolved”.
Dear Wandile
Shalom.
An organization where all members have to believe the same is a cult. They have a cult leader, and have to submit to him.
You are a typical Roman Catholic. You twist and misuse the scriptures, like Matthew 18: 17-18. These are verses about how to handle sin, not about different opinions. If the Bible say something is sin, it is sin. And all who call it “holy” or noble are false teachers. The most prominent false teacher is the Pope.
In every Church, there will be different opinions. Both in matters of who, where and when. People are permitted to disagree, without being branded as Judas.
This is just another example of the wickedness of the Papacy, who demand submission to his false teachings and not biblical authority.
Not only are people permitted to disagree—they have a duty to voice their dissent, in order to keep the church on the right track. Over the centuries, it has been because of the iron control of the RCC hierarchy, that the RCC has crushed dissent and subsequently, strayed so far from the truth of the word of God. The Apostle Paul, in1 Corinthians 11:18 tells us, “First, I hear that there are divisions among you when you meet as a church, and to some extent, I believe it. But, of course, there must be divisions among you so that you who have God’s approval will be recognized.”
While, in opposition to RCC activists, the RCC has the correct position on the particular issues in question (abortion and homosexuality), that still does not justify their belligerence toward any and all dissent from their leading.
Cults attempt to crush dissent as a means of controlling its members.
Dear job3627
Shalom, and love in Jesus the Messiah.
Thanks for this comment. May Lord of God of Israel keep on blessing you and your house. Amen.
Amen Amen Amen and Amen again!
There’s nothing new on this matters people are being told to leave this false church because they don’t agree with her teaching, Like Purgatory, Mariology ect
Ivar
Everyone MUST believe the same thing as far as doctrine and dogma goes for these are divine truths revealed to the faithful by God through his Church.
For other theological issues there is room for varying opinion but not in dogma and doctrine
See the Church is the voice of God on earth. Through his Church, God speaks and those who do not listen are not only opposing the Church but going against God. So it is written in god’s word :
“But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know
how thou oughtest to behave thyself in
the house of God, which is the church of
the living God, THE PILLAR AND FOUNDATION OF THE TRUTH.”
(1 Timothy
3:15)
So the verse I quoted in the earlier post was not taken out of context. YES it is talking about sin and how we deal with it. if one does not listen to the Church, he sins for going against God for God speaks through His Church. 🙂
2- The most Prominent false teacher is the Pope?
Any evidence? Keep it short please so its can be easy to reply. (Also substantiate your claims by bringing evidence)
Dear Wandile
Shalom.
You have not answered the last comment I had, where I wrote about the Pope and God being given the same title by Roman Catholics.
The Pope is NOT the “Holy father”. Only Father God in Heaven is “The Holy Father”. Since there is a dogma in the Catholic Church that all must submit to Roman Catholic dogmas, I guess we do not need any other proof than this to brand the Pope as a false teacher.
I will reply to your question in two froms :
In short ; Catholics call the pope “Holy Father” not as an
acknowledgement of his personal state of soul but as an expression of respect for his office as successor to Peter and head of the Church on earth. His is a holy office.
In long and more detailed form ; The word “pope” is a derivative of the Greek word
“pappas” (“papa” in Italian) which means “father” or
“daddy”. The Pope is called the “Holy Father” not
because he is necessarily holier than anyone else, but
because his role is a mission of spiritual fatherhood
over the Church.
Dear Wandile
Shalom.
I understand this Roman Catholic dogma, and that you accept it and promote it. But I do not. I will rather die as a martyr, that to ever call a mortal man for “the Holy Father”.
I have enough respect for the Word of God to ONLY call my Father God in Heaven, “The Holy Father”. And I fear men less than i fear God.
You should do likewise, if you do not want to perish. To call the Pope for “The Holy Father” is blasphemy.
I will reply to your question in two froms :
In short ; Catholics call the pope “Holy Father” not as an
acknowledgement of his personal state of soul but as an expression of respect for his office as successor to Peter and head of the Church on earth. His is a holy office.
In long and more detailed form ; The word “pope” is a derivative of the Greek word
“pappas” (“papa” in Italian) which means “father” or
“daddy”. The Pope is called the “Holy Father” not
because he is necessarily holier than anyone else, but
because his role is a mission of spiritual fatherhood
over the Church.
Protestants object to the title as they believe they we
should “call no man father” (Matthew 23:9) as we read
in scripture. But we find in other instances in scripture
that there is nothing wrong with calling someone
“father”. What Christ referred to in Matthew 23:9 was
the hypocrisy of the Pharisees for their pride in not
looking humbly to God as the source of authority,
fatherhood and teaching, but instead setting
themselves up as ultimate authorities, father figures
and teachers. Jesus used the “call no man father”
hyperbole to highlight this. If we were to take his word
on face value, then we could not even call our
biological and earthly fathers “father”, and there’s no
sense in that!
Matthew 3:9 – Jesus calls Abraham “father”
Acts 7:2 – St. Stephen calls Jewish leaders “fathers”
Acts 21:40, 22:1 – St. Paul calls Jerusalem Jews
“fathers”
Romans 4:16-17 – Abraham called “the father of us all”
1 Corinthians 4:14-15 – “I become your father in Christ
through the gospel…”
1 Timothy 1:2 – St. Paul refers to Timothy as his son
(that would make St. Paul a father figure of sorts)
Hebrews 12:7-9 – we have earthly fathers to discipline
us
1 John 2:13, 14 – “I write to you, fathers, because you
know him…”
There are several meanings for the word “holy” and that
is what the young man did not understand. If holy simply means without sin, it is hard to see why “things” are called holy.
For example, the HOLY OF HOLIES is a
place. Is it called holy because it has not sinned?
And what about HOLY GROUND? God told Moses to remove his sandals — he was standing on HOLY GROUND. I guess that means that this dirt had not sinned but the dirt in the next gully had sinnned. HUH? The word HOLY in Hebrew is kodesh and means apartness, holiness, sacredness, consecration, separateness. Holiness can mean without sin. It can also means dedicated or set apart for God. So, is the Pope holy in the sense of being completely sinless? Of course not. But the Pope is set apart for God in a special way as the HOLY Father, the Vicar of Christ, the Bishop of Rome and the Successor of Peter.
PS Remember that even WE who are called holy. Paul
considered all of us saints (literally “holy ones” with a
small “s”). He writes,
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and
Timothy our brother. To the church of God which is at
Corinth, with all the saints (literally: “holy ones”) who are
in the whole of Achaia: Grace to you and peace from
God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ ( 2 Corinthians
1:1-2).
It should be noted that “Holy Father” is not an
official title of the Pope. As of this year, the
Pope’s official titles are “Bishop of Rome, Vicar
of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of the
Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal
Church, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and
Metropolitan of the Roman province,
Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City,
Servant of the Servants of God.”
The “Holy” in his title also only refers to the office of Pope not necessarily to the individual though I pray it always does. (On the past there have been some bad Popes)
Dear Wandile
Shalom.
You wrote:
It should be noted that “Holy Father” is not an official title of the Pope. As of this year, the Pope’s official titles are “Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Jesus Christ, Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman province, Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City, Servant of the Servants of God.”
My comment:
It might be so, that “Holy Father” is not the official title of the Pope. But all Roman Catholics, without failure, address him as “Holy Father”. Many Roman Catholics even address their local Roman Catholic priests as “holy father”.
Lets take a look at the other titles:
1. Bishop of Rome:
The seat of the Bishop of Rome was not there when Jesus walked on Earth. Neither among the Apostles who spread the gospel. Paul wrote the letter to to the Romans, without addressing a ‘bishop in Rome”.
Peter the Apostle wrote two letters, not mentioning a “bishop in Rome”. He wrote one of His letters from Babylonia, and was sent eastwards to be an apostle to the Jews living in Parthia, one of the enemies of the pagan Roman Empire.
2. Vicar of Jesus Christ:
No man can be the vicar (the replacement of Christ) on Earth. That is another blasphemy, and a sin against the Holy Spirit. It WILL NEVER be forgiven. To claim that a man is the vicar of Christ, is to take this title from the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the vicar of Christ, His very replacement. Who was sent from Heaven, 50 days after Jesus had ascended back to His Throne in Heaven.
3. Successor of the Prince of the Apostles:
There was no prince among the apostles. Only fishermen and men of low status. I did not know that the Roman Catholic Church also blaspheme the Apostles, by a claim that one of them were a prince. What a defamation of a fishermen named Peter, a sinner and apostle of the Messiah.
4. Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church.
To claim superiority was the claim of the Pagan Emperor of Rome, the head of the pagan Roman religion. The title of your Pontiff is Pontifex Maximus. The Pope is the successor of the Roman Emperor. He prove this by simply copying both the authority and the title of Caesar.
You said :
“I understand this Roman Catholic
dogma, and that you accept it and
promote it. But I do not. I will rather
die as a martyr, that to ever call a
mortal man for “the Holy Father”.”
Get your facts straight Ivar. It is not a dogma to call the Pope Holy Father (shaking my head).
Dear Wandile
I think pope claiming to be a successor to Peter is blasphemy
Peter was never a pope or even a prince of apostles it just a Traditions of RCC
not scriptures
In case Of Holy father pope cannot be a holy father cus he is a sinner so he don’t deserve to be maybe rather to call him a fake vicar of Christ
What you think doesn’t matter hey. The plain TRUTH is that the Pope is the successor of Peter as the Bishop of Rome. Check your history please?
Secondly Prince of the apostles is a title which highlights his primacy among the apostle as well as his supreme authority as the prime tender of God’s sheep.
The Holy Father issue : I already explained how Holy Father is applied to the Pope. The title does not pertain to his state of sin. Read my post again
Dear Wandile
Shalom.
You wrote:
Secondly Prince of the apostles is a title which highlights his primacy among the apostle as well as his supreme authority as the prime tender of God’s sheep.
My comment:
I know that you feel this to be correct. But we have tried t explain to you that the Holy Spirit is the replacement of Jesus the Messiah on Earth. Still you refuse to listen.
I fully understand your claim, and why you can not obey the truth. Because any Roman Catholic who accept this Pontifical claim to be sin against the Holy Spirit, is giving an acceptance of a spiritual disaster.
Sin against the Holy Spirit is a sin which will never be forgiven.
Since Jesus will not forgive you, how can you expect me to join you in your falsehood?
Ivar just so you know , no Catholic believes the Pope is the replacement of Christ. The holy Spirit was sent to Guide the Church in spirit that we may be in the light of Truth.
The office of Pope is the Vicar of Christ. In this it means its the deputy of Christ. The Pope take on the physical control of Christ’s Church while Christ is not physically present on Earth. He is to keep the Church in the light if Truth through the guidance of the Holy Spirit (the Spirit of truth).
You mistakenly think that we think the Pope does the Same Job as the Holy Spirit. The do two different Jobs that together keep the Church as the pillar and foundation of truth.
You clearly do not understand what a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is for if you did you would not accuse the Church of blasphemy or me for that matter.
I pray for dearly 😦
Wandilie,
You said: “Prince of the apostles is a title which highlights his primacy among the apostle (sic) as well as his supreme authority as the prime tender of God’s sheep.”
There is NO such thing as the “prince of the apostles”! In Mark 10:35-45, Jesus rebuked James and John when they requested favored positions in the Kingdom:
“35 Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to him. “Teacher,” they said, “we want you to do for us whatever we ask.”
36 “What do you want me to do for you?” he asked.
37 They replied, “Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory.”
38 “You don’t know what you are asking,” Jesus said. “Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?”
39 “We can,” they answered.
Jesus said to them, “You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, 40 but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared.”
41 When the ten heard about this, they became indignant with James and John. 42 Jesus called them together and said, “You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 43 Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 44 and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. 45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
Dear Wandile,
It is VERY obvious that you are not a regular reader of the Bible.
You quoted some verses in which you are trying to prove that Jesus called other men “father” or “fathers”, and you also took most of the verses out of context. Jesus never said this, but in Matthew 23:9 he said, “And call no MAN your father upon the earth; for one is your Father, which is in heaven.”
1. Matthew 3:9 It was not Jesus calling Abraham “father”. It was John the Baptist speaking to the Pharisees and Sadduces, calling them vipers… saying to them, And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father…Indeed Abraham is father to all of the nation of Israel. The Pharisees and Sadducees are Jews, decendants from the seed of Abraham.
2. Acts 7:2 Stephen was addressing the council, which was comprised of MEN. Women were not permitted to hold a place in the courts or councils. Stephen said…And he (Stephen) said, Men, brethren, and fathers hearken… he is addressing the older men as fathers, the younger men as brethren but the brethren were not literally his brothers, these are figurative terms in addressing the MEN in the council accusing him of blasphemy.
3. Acts 21:40, 22:1 Paul was taken into the castle by the centurions and soldiers, Paul on the stairs addressed those hearing his case, in hebrew…Men, brethren and fathers…this seems to be a way to politely speak to those in authority. Obviously their were young men, adult men and elderly men in the castle.
4. Romans 4:16-17 Abraham is the patriarch of the Hebrew nation, thus the father of all (nation of Israel). God said to Abram in Gen 13:16 And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth; so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered. Abraham was CHOSEN by GOD to be the FATHER of a particular people, the Jews/Hebrew children/Israel. Abram is not “any man”. God spoke hrough the prophet Isaiah 51:2 Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him and increased him.
5. 1 Cor 4:14-15 In vs 14, Paul adresses new converts as “little children”. He is delivering the gospel of Christ. He is more than a teacher. A born again convert is called a “baby” christian. They start on the milk and as they grow in their faith, they are given “meat”. If a convert is “born again”, usually a person leads them to Christ, thus the teacher has greater authority and such is the father. Paul does not say that they must call him father or nowhere in the scriptures does Paul address himself as Father Paul. He is only making an comparison to others that call themselves teachers who do not lead a soul to be born again.
6. 1 Tim 1:2 Paul addresses Timothy as my son “in the faith”, he does not say “my son of my flesh” or “my son of my loins”. Paul also mentions God OUR Father. In this way, Paul is confirming the God is THE FATHER of Timothy. Timothy has a special place in Paul’s heart. He is very young but on fire for Jesus and preaching the gospel. In 1 Tim 5:1 Paul instructs us to Rebuke not an elder, but entreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren; the elder women as mothers;the younger as sisters. We are to treat each other as we would treat our own family members. God is the Father of all therefore we are all brothers/sisters and the elders are respected as we would respect our own parents. Paul does not say to call them father or mother, only to treat them as we would our own.
7. Heb 12:7-9 Wandile, you have taken this out of context. Paul is addressing a group, he used the plural in speaking to them. He is including himself in saying “we”, because “we” all have a father of our flesh, otherwise “we” would not have been born. Every human has a father.
8. 1 john 2:13-14 Again, you have taken this out of context. John is addressing christian men who are in different stages of their faith. The little children are the newly born again christians, The fathers are the elderly who followed the laws of Moses, thus knowing God first in the old covenant , before Jesus-new covenant came. The young men are the overcomers, those who are abiding in Christ, growing in their faith.
The Bible clearly states who our Father is, he is God. Paul never addresses himself as father in his epistles. To the Romans he identifies himself as Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle. To the 1Corinthians, Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ. In 2 Corinthians, Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ…and Timothy our brother. To the Galations, Paul, an apostle (not of men, neither by man but by Jesus Christ…as well to the Ephesians. To the Phillipians, he calls himself and Timothy servants of Jesus Christ. To the Colossians, Paul an apostle of Jesus Christ and Timotheus our brother. Philemon, Paul a prisoner of Jesus Christ. Paul only used the word father as an example of his love for those he mentored and in addressing groups of men out of tradition and respect in the councils and courts.
God Bless!
Wandalie.
Vicar means ” in place of”. To put it it simple terms without rambling : we don’t need any “holy father ” to take Jesus’ place on earth. He left His Holy Spirit on earth for that job. In fact He left so the Spirit would come. I know the RCC believes they have dibbs on the Holy spirit and that they can confine the Spirit to the sacraments believing they have a monopoly on grace Simply wrong. The Holy Spirit is alive and well in believers of all denominations ; in those who accept Him as savior He is alive in believers in the jungle being martyred where there is no RCC So you see, the RCC can not hand out grace like they are the source and tout there is no salvation outside of the RCC. Lies. Lies. Lies.
Dear Sue.
Shalom.
Thanks for this comment:
The Papacy is again playing double games. Vatican II did not give the Roman Catholics permission to leave, but opened up for the harlots to return to their mother.
The Papacy is excommunicating Roman Catholics to the fire of Hell. And those who object to the dogmas, as Judas’es among brethren. So either you will burn in Hell, or you will eventually go and hang your self.
This is the decoded message from the Pope.
May Jesus give you power by the Holy Spirit to tell the truth about the “Church” who raised you, and you have left to follow the Messiah. May the Spirit of Truth reign in your heart today and forever. Amen.
Amen.
Oh Lord, restore the spirit and power of Elijah, “if baal (or mary) is god, serve him/her, if the Lord is God, serve him…..The God who answers by fire. The God who consumes the sacrifice, fire that burns up everything that should not be there….
U can go round, and round, and up and down, and back around again, perpetually exposing the romanist lies and 1/2 truths. But it is the anointing that breaks the yoke…who the SON sets free is free indeed.
Shalom, Jonathan
The Apostle Paul (Saul the converted pharisee Jew):-
“On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the GENTILES, just as Peter had been to the JEWS. For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the JEWS, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the GENTILES”
Gal 2:7-8
Peter was a JEWISH fisherman, released into an apostolic ministry to the JEWS, not roman gentiles. No one from the rcc has yet explained (at least without the need to reference tedious and subjective patristic sources) exactly how the early church morphed from a community of messianic Jewish believers into an institutionally anti semitic socio-economic politicised organisation run by roman senators (bishops)??
Read some of David Barons stuff to get a powerful insight into the actual relationship of romanized official anti semitism, and the way it has prevented many Jews from responding to the gospel, and how replacement theology has exacerbated this sorry saga of the last 2 millenia…
Dear Jonathan.
Shalom.
You are right.
I have many times questioned the error of claiming “St. Peters chair” to be located in Rome.
Why not claim ‘St.Paul’s chair” to be in Rome. He was an apostle to the Gentiles and we know he was on his way to the gentiles in Rome?
Paul even wrote a letter to the Romans. Among the receivers, there might have been Jews in the service of the Roman Emperor, who had accepted Jesus as the Messiah.
It would have been difficult to deny any claim that Paul became the first bishop of Rome.
The source of the error, is the claim that the Pope has the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. Paul never claimed to have these “keys”. So to claim that the Pope is a successor of Paul, would leave the Pope without his keys, and the Roman Catholics without the clues.
Amen to that Jonathan.
It did not take long for me to see the false teaching of the catholic cult. one…how many have looked at the catholic church building and saw the cresent moon and stars on the front, or Mary standing on the cresent moon and starts. or how about John Paul 2 that said, I am dying but have to go to the statue of Mary to thank her for healing and onto purgatory for some sins..and telling the Imam of Islam that they serve the same god. Paul preached about the “other Jesus” and warned us all. John Paul 2 said his Jesus, that you had to go to purgatory but MY JESUS paid it ALL..When He died on the cross, the vail split in two..and we are able to go to the throne room to ask for forgiveness..and we are NOT to call any man Father but HIM…for me to see all the apostasy falling away churches put themselves under the catholic umbrella is ot deny CHRIST..The mormon church also has the creset moon and stars on their temple..go look…Either Christ paid it al or none at all…John Paul also said: when I get out of purgatory, I will go to heaven and stand at the right hand of the father..pray to me……I was so shocked to hear that and to think he would ever say he would be in the place of Jesus..apostasy in the last days is the last prophecy to be fulfilled and like living in the days of Noah..how were they? gays, mocking G-d..AND REMEMBER pETER WAS NOT THE rock,,jESUS WAS TALKING ABOUT HIMSLEF…NOW THE CHURCHES ALL PRAY WITH THE CULTS IN UNITY. THE GOSPEL IS OUT…wE ARE TO TELL THEM ABOUT THE GOSPEL AND IF THEY DON’T EXCEPT THE TRUTH AFTER THREE TIMES, it SAYS FROM such turn away…but they do not..HE is coming and not to forget HE told us days one genesis 12 all thru how he will curse those who do not suport Israel and the nations going against HER will be destroyed. Hello Issac..
If you want hard proof such as Jesus’ saying “Peter, you’re the Pope”, you will not find it just as you will not find the word Trinity either. Both, however, are contained in the NT.
I think what is most important in this discussion is to realize that the Papalcy is first and foremost a Ministry in the Church – The Petrine Ministry. To understand what the nature of Ministry is go to the letters of Paul especially 1 Corinthians.
If we understand that the role of the Pope is a ministry then we can begin to study the scriptural basis for this Ministry.
Paul, teaches, in 1 Corinthians teaches that all ministries come from a Special Chraism (Grace) from the Holy Spirit. That is why I believe Matthew 16: 16 – 19 is so very important, however, for me the key is not so much verses 18 – 19, rather, verse 17.
In verse 16, Simon Peter declares Jesus to be, “The Son of the Living God” (thus Simon Peter is declaring Jesus to be God). But then comes verse 17 and Jesus’ response. He tells Simon Peter that it was the Father who has revealed this to Simon Peter alone, not to the other Apostles. Here, I believe, we have the scriptural basis of Peter’s ministry – the unique working of the Holy Spirit in Peter alone. Therefore, it is because of the unique gift of the Holy Spirit to Peter that Jesus proceeds to announce to Peter and the other Apostles, the nature of Peter’s unique Ministry in the Church (vs 18 & 19). The grace of this Charism is so strong that even overcomes Peter’s denials of Jesus and leads to what we find John 21: 15 – 19.
Through out Acts, we find Peter’s role in the Church is never based upon a De Jure authority. First, in the choosing of Matthais,
Peter uses the authority of Scripture and the Holy Spirit working through Scripture to express to the community gathered in Jerusalem of the necessity of choosing someone to replace Judas. Here we see Peter’s authority is based in the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, in Peter alone.
In the conversion of Cornelius and Cornelius’ House Hold, we find the Holy Spirit moving Peter to first accept food that the Mosaic Law had declared unclean, thus opening the way of the conversion of the Gentiles. In Chapter 11 of Acts, when Peter is called to justify his actions in the conversion and Baptism of Cornelius, Peter doesn’t resort to saying something like, “I’m the Pope, do what I say.” No Peter’s authority lies in that he was guided through out this event by the Holy Spirit. Again, an example of the Holy Spirit guiding Peter in a unique way amoung the Apostles and the Church.
Even at the Council of Jerusalem, a Council presided over by James not Peter, it was Peter’s speach that move the Council to listen to Paul. Again, authority based on the Holy Spirit working uniquely in Peter that the rest of the Church recognized. And as stated by someone else, the Church recognized Peter’s role as expressed by always placing Peter number 1 when ever the list of the Apostles were given. Paul re-enforces Peter’s unique role when in 1 Corinthians 15 vs 5, Paul stated that after the Resurrection Christ appeared first to Peter than to the other Apostles then to more than 500 brothers at once. But it was to Peter, alone, that Christ appeared first.
I hope, I haven’t gone too long in my post but more important I hope I have shown that Peter was the First Pope, in the role of the Pope is properly understood, namely, the unique Ministry in the Church to Feed and Tend Christ sheep and lambs – The Church
“I hope, I haven’t gone too long in my post but more important I hope I have shown that Peter was the First Pope, in the role of the Pope is properly understood, namely, the unique Ministry in the Church to Feed and Tend Christ sheep and lambs – The Church”
Yet you ignore scripture. In Galations 2:7-14 Paul clearly establishes the He, himself, would be the Pope of the non-Messianic church.
“On the contrary, they saw that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles,[a] just as Peter had been to the Jews.[b] 8 For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the Gentiles. 9 James, Peter[c] and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews. 10 All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.
Paul Opposes Peter
11 When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12 Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?”
In fact Peter, again, is caught red-handed leading the flock astray. As I pause for thought, I realize that the Pope is not a scripturally authorized Christian office of the church. So, actually, like Peter, the Pope continues the tradition to lead people astray. I guess you’re right, Peter was the first Pope, the first leader of the apostasy church.
God is not a respector of persons….period.
Lori,
Your comment makes no sense. For Jesus Christ does tell us how to behave and to respect.
1 Peter 3:14-6 But even if you should suffer for righteousness’ sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.
Dear Michael.
Shalom.
You wrote:
– the unique working of the Holy Spirit in Peter alone. Therefore, it is because of the unique gift of the Holy Spirit to Peter that Jesus proceeds to announce to Peter and the other Apostles, the nature of Peter’s unique Ministry in the Church.
My comment:
This is surly blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
1. The Holy Spirit is the vicar of Christ.
2. The Holy spirit is available to all who accept the Lordship of Jesus.
3. The new Royal priesthood is a priesthood of all believers. Those who elevate one post above others, are antichrists. On top of the pyramid they build, will be the antichrist.
We have but one high priest, Yeshua. He fulfilled the role of all the priests before Him. The Catholic priesthood is a mockery. It is finished. There is no more sacrifice for sin. He paid it all. But the RCC does not think the one time sacrifice was enough so they reinact if every day over and over for forgiveness of sin. It is still not sufficient. Those who die must suffer for their sins in purgatory because His blood wasn’t enough to cleanse abd save. These are lies from the pit that negate scripture and put people in bondage. Where is the good news in paying for your sin in purgatory. No. The good news is He paid it ALL and for that we rejoice.
Michael,
You said: If you want hard proof such as Jesus’ saying “Peter, you’re the Pope”, you will not find it just as you will not find the word Trinity either. Both, however, are contained in the NT.
My comment: There is no REFERENCE at all in the Word of God which claim Peter is the Pope. You say we won’t find the exact words, and then you follow up the comment with the word Trinity.
Yet there are many references in the Word of God which indicates, God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit is One. Just like this verse.
John 16: 12″I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. 15All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you. *end of verse*
Yet, you will find again no reference which indicates Peter is some kind of Pope. It’s pretty sad this twisting of God’s word, to suit the catholic lies.
No one doubts Peter’s leadership position, however that does not mean infallible pope ( mind you the doctrine of infallibility wasn’t until the 1800’s)and that was thrown into the mix in the name of “Sacred Tradition” being on par with scripture and considered equal to scripture which is complete nonsense.
Dear Sue.
Shalom.
In the sense of leadership position, those who were leaders where not elevated, but rather reduced to servants of them all. The claim of any superiority of Peter is a blunt lie, blasphemy and a doctrine taught by demons.
I agree with you Ivar. Peter himself said not to “lord” leadership over others!
http://bible.cc/1_peter/5-3.htm
What the pope does is the exact opposite of scripture.
Sue.
Shalom.
I know you agree with me. But I wanted to underline the faulty and corrupt RCC view of leadership. The papal structure makes a mockery of the teachings of Jesus, and gives a bad name to true Christians on the face of the Earth.
We must all take a stand against this wicked religious movement.
Dear Micheal
Shalom
That doesn’t make Peter a pope only a claim of apostacy Church claiming that Peter was first among apostles is heresy
is a only traditions Of Catholicism that make peter a pope and he wasn’t and Your pope can’t be a vicar of Christ because Jesus didn’t appoint any sinners to stand for him, he send the Holy spirit to lead us into truth rather than a fake claim we can simply call A pope of rome a vicar of hell cus he claim to be infallible when he sit in the chair of satan
Just edited my comment. Please view to see what I meant.
Michael, tell us friend, how and why did the rcc religion accept, tolerate, promote (and profit from) an official policy of anti semitism? Why did they support pogroms?
Why did the rcc attempt to invent its own set of “fathers” (the Jews had God-appointed ones such as Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob (Israel) Moses, David, Solomon, Jehoshaphat, Josiah, Peter, Paul etc.
As for feed the lambs, is that supposed to be sarcastic and cynical? The rcc has a long and disgusting track record of brutal violence and persecution of true Biblical righteousness, and alongside that official policy of murder, has persistently sought to promote their own form of righteousness based on legalism, works and pious self righteousness. Why did the rcc if it claims to represent Yeshua on earth (LOL), see fit to defame, persecute, terrorise, oppress or murder anyone who refused to accept its unbiblical religious dogmas (not that it has any sincere Biblical ones any way). It is responsible for Gentile and Jewish blood being spilled in that respect. Why did the rcc in its pompous arrogance decide that it knew better than God himself, and devise the concept of replacement theology? Those power mad roman senator emperor wannabees simply couldnt accept that the JEWS were and are still the apple of God’s eye, that it was Jerusalem and not rome that is the centre of the world. So they invented a perverse Christless doctrine that promotes the idea that the rcc has outmanouevered Israel as the recipients of Gods covenant favour and blessing….so opening the way to the official condoning of harrassment and expulsion of Jews, appropriation of their possessions, and ultimately pogroms and holocausts. Hey while we are on the subject, why did the rcc cardinals support hilter?
Shalom, Jonathan
AMEN AGAIN JONATHAN. Thank you.
Dear Wandile
Shalom
There’s no scriptural references to support your claim of papacy i’ve been saying this again and again that such claim contridict the word of God
Christ himself didn’t appoint anyone to be vicar he gave that role to the Holy spirit
And one thing your pope has made such claim is that Catholic church is the only true church jesus founded years ago that is blasphemy The true church started at Jerusalem not Rome
Jonathan I’ll asnwer your objections by reffering you to a member of the early Church showing the office of Pope and the primacy of Peter and The Church of Rome :
St. Irenaeus
(edited by the Editor).
Dear Wandile
Shalom.
I feel we have come to the end of the road. You have stopped debating, and started to publish Papal bulls and booklets.
Kindly find another website , who might permit the distribution of such falsehood.
Wandilie,
It is a mistake to try to prove any theological position from the writings of the early church. We know that the early church was very quickly beset by false teachers (read Peter’s prediction in Acts 20:28-29 and his final warning about false teachers in his second epistle, written shortly before his death, where he sternly admonishes them to pay attention to Scripture (and he counts the writings of the Apostles as Scripture–see 2 Peter 3:16). Peter’s epistles were written, by the way, NOT from Rome, but from Asia Minor). If you want to take the writings of the early church as proof of anything, I would remind you that there were many fanciful tales circulated in the early church, many of which contradicted each other. Only God’s word is completely trustworthy.
You should know that the Apostle Paul said that Peter was NOT with him in A.D. 65 (see 2 Timothy 4:11) even though the RCC says that he was. As a matter of fact, Paul wrote at least six epistles from Rome and not once does he mention Peter being there with him.
At the times when the RCC insists that Peter was in Rome, the Bible shows that he was clearly in the East. Around 45 A.D. it recounts the episode of Peter being cast into prison at Jerusalem (Acts 12:3, 4). And then, in 49 A.D., he was still in Jerusalem, this time attending the Jerusalem Council. About 51 A.D., he was still in the East—in Antioch of Syria where he got into an argument with Paul because he wouldn’t sit or eat with the Gentiles because he feared to alienate the Jewish believers. Isn’t it a bit odd that the “Roman bishop” would have been shrinking from Gentiles in 51 A.D.? In or around 66 A.D., Peter is STILL in the east—in the city of Babylon—among the Jews there (I Pet. 5:13).
Peter was “the Apostle to the circumcised”. He was in the East because historical accounts tell us that there were as many Jews in Asia Minor in Christ’s time as there were in Palestine. And a large number of Jews were living in Babylon at the time. Language scholars say Peter’s writings are strongly Aramaic in flavor and that it was the type of Aramaic that would be specific to Babylon. It makes a great deal of sense that Peter’s writings would be flavored by the East where he clearly spent a great deal (if not all) of his time after the Resurrection. And just when was he supposed to have founded the church at Rome as the RCC insists? There are many supposed “historical accounts” of Peter having been in Rome but none of them are first hand accounts. They should NEVER be adhered to above the accounts written in the Bible.
Wandalie,
You said:
The office of Pope is the Vicar of Christ. In this it means its the deputy of Christ. The Pope take on the physical control of Christ’s Church while Christ is not physically present on Earth. He is to keep the Church in the light if Truth through the guidance of the Holy Spirit (the Spirit of truth).
My comment:
You don’t make sense. You said Jesus is physically not present on earth. I thought that’s what the Eucharist is in Catholic terms- that he is physically present. Your own words condemn you. You are correct. Jesus sits at the right hand in his glorified body. And In His physical absence He gave us the Holy Spirit. He will return to earth the same way he left- among the clouds.
He can not be physically present in heaven and physically present on earth or then we would have millions of incarnations when we know there is only ONE.
Sue
I have not contrAdicted myself. You are relating two different ideas to the same situation. When I say Jesus is not here in physical form , I mean he is not standing here on a mountain preaching to us like he was in the 1st century AD.
The Eucharistic real presence of the body of Christ is a miraculous event where the bread and wine become his body and blood literally yet this happens only when called upon. The eucharist does not preach on the mountain tops or walk on water (face palm)
This was honestly a pathetic argument and simply and excuse to slander God’s Church. I feel sorry for you Sue that you left the fullness of Truth for a branch started by heretics (Reformers) 😦
Please don’t feel sorry for me. The RCC thinks it can command Yeshua off His throne into a piece of bread that you eat , goes into the digestive system and into a sewer tank. What could be more blasphemous than that?
Yeshua gave his Holy Spirit to live inside believers. That’s not enough? They need to eat God as the Holy Spirit isn’t enough ? Makes ZERO SENSE. Zero.
Wandile. I think it’s time to hang your hat and move on. You’re not convincing anyone over here.
You however did not address the fact that if Yeshua is contained in bread and on the throne there is then more than one incarnation.
Also consider: the glorified body of King Jesus can not rot and Eucharistic bread does– molds and rots.
http://bible.cc/psalms/16-10.htm
My argument is not poor. Your church claims Jesus is helpless and can not speak in a piece of bread. Because He can’t speak He needs a sinful human to take His place and be His mouthpiece?
When Messiah returns He will return as the Lion of Judah. The way the angel said He would. The day is getting nearer. Hallelujah.
Wandilie,
The notion of Transubstantiation (which you have just described) is plain pagan mysticism. It was NEVER taught by the Apostles—as Jewish men, they would have been horrified by the suggestion. The Bible simply does not teach any form of mysticism. There is a vast difference between the spirituality provided by the Holy Spirit and the mysticism that comes from the evil one.
The pagan mystery religions all stressed the idea that an initiate could somehow merge with a god if one partook of some ritual–usually under the influence of some kind of drug. What Christ taught was that we should remember His victory over sin and death for us, symbolized by the eating of bread (His body broken for us) and drinking wine (His Blood shed for us). AT NO POINT do we merge in some mystical way with God. While the Bible often uses symbol to teach spiritual truth, it NEVER employs any kind of mysticism.
Sue
Shalom
I totally agree with you Catholic claim that everytime they have eucharist Jesus is present
True to form, typical rcc opologist refers you to the same old clapped out subjective patristic sources. You havent answered any objection at all!
Michael, can you speak in plain terms, tell us about the issues I mentioned such as:-
why the rcc supports and promotes anti semitism and replacement theology?
why does the rcc support pogroms?
Why did the rcc invent its own church fathers (and invest anti biblical authority and influence in and thriough them?
Why did the rcc support hitler?
Why did the rcc adopt an official policy of brutal, cruel, arbitrary (fascist) suppression of any person or institution that threatened its autonomy?
To Sue and Jonathan
A bit about transubstantiation is :
“The Holy Eucharist is a sacrament and a sacrifice. In the Holy Eucharist, under the appearances of bread and wine, the Lord Jesus Christ is contained, offered, and received. (a) The whole Christ is really, truly, and substantially present in the Holy Eucharist. We use the words ‘really, truly, and substantially’ to describe Christ’s presence in the Holy Eucharist in order to distinguish Our Lord’s teaching from that of mere men who falsely teach that the Holy Eucharist is only a sign or figure of Christ, or that He is present only by His power.”
The Catechism teaches that our Lord instituted the sacrament of Holy Eucharist at the Last Supper. In answer to the question, “What happened when Our Lord said: ‘This is my body…this is my blood’?” on page 276, the Catechism says:
“When Our Lord said, ‘This is My body,’ the entire substance of the bread was changed into His body; and when He said, ‘This is My blood,’ the entire substance of the wine was changed into his blood. (a) Christ could not have used clearer, more explicit words than ‘This is My body.’ He did not say, ‘This is a sign of My body,’ or ‘This represents My body,’ but ‘This is My body.’Catholics take Christ at His word because He is the omnipotent God. On His word they know that the Holy Eucharist is the body and blood of Christ.”
NOW FOR THE EDVIDENCE THAT THE NEW TESTAMENT AND THE EARLY CHURCH BELIEVED IN TRANSUBSTANTIATION
The Letter to the Smyrnaeans (often simply called To the Smyrnaeans) was written by Saint Ignatius of Antioch (Was taught by John the Apostle) around AD 110 to the Early Christians in Smyrna.
They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that THE EUCHARIST IS THE FLESH OF OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST , Flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His goodness, raised up again. (Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans).
I will only quote him because Ivar doesn’t like me quoting mounts of concrete evidence. So now for the News Testament :
“Whoever EATS MY FLESH and DRINKS MY BLOOD HAS ETERNAL LIFE , and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him”
(John 6:54-56)
NOTHING CAN BE CLEARER THAN THIS PASSAGE ABOVE!
“Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy maner shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord.”
(I Corinthians 11:23-29. Note especially verse 27:)
[If it’s not really the body and blood of our Lord how can you be guilty of “the body and blood of our Lord”?]
Verse 29 is just as forceful:
“For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.”
Now many protestant apologists, in a desperate attempt to refute transubstantiation, perform the art of eisegesis. They claim that these words are metaphorical and not literal but nothing can be clearer than the above passages and that is why some of Jesus’ desciples deserted him. They left him because the could not come to grips with eating his flesh and blood (Transubstantiation)
[Side note : Eisegesis is the process of misinterpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that it introduces one’s own presuppositions, agendas, and/or biases into and onto the text.]
I have done my Job here and I hope that Christ may open your hearts up to the fullness of truth in his One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Amen
What is this a ‘Catholic Convention’??? so much defense for an approved Cult in America and around the World… a lot of people so happy to be heading for the Gates of Hell if they don’t repent soon….seriously ….!! These blind people need Jesus they follow their blind guides and they both will end up in a ditch!
Matthew 23:24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
Matthew 23:25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
Who said I was a protestant??? Mystified….And subjectively presented speculations and theological opinions dont amount to concrete evidence! The wise man built his house upon the rock.
Any way, Yeshua, (the Lord Jesus) is seated actually in Heaven at the right hand of God the father. He will return one day actually to the mount of Olives. Until then he gave us His Spirit. He lives in those who are born again, redeemed by the blood which Yeshua the faithful high priest offered, and which exists for ever on the mercy seat. The bread and wine originates in the passover seder, which was instituted by God (not popes), and annually celebrated to remind the Jewish people of how God delivered them from slavery in Egypt. Jesus told his disciples to do this passover meal as often as they wanted, in remembrance of what He (the lamb of God that TAKES AWAY the sins of the world, has acheived for us.) He was crucified during passover.
The power and presence of God is given by His Spirit, it doesnt come to belivers through bread wafers and red wine. This is a paganised voodoo concept, that supernatural godly life exists and can be transmitted through inert things, it is idolatry. Yeshua lives in a believers spirit and makes the believer alive “for you died and your life is now hidden with Christ in God” “The fulness of the Godhead bodily dwells in the Lord, AND YOU HAVE BEEN GIVEN FULNESS IN HIM”
shalom, Jonathan
Jonathan. Fantastic succinct summary.
By the way when did I ask to be lectured about transubstanceation?
Still no response regarding replacement theology, anti semitism, pogroms etc……and its highy unlikely too, because those things are central foundational tenets of rcc doctrine….
Dear Wandalie
Shalom
You Confused yourself by Claiming to eat and drink jesus everytime you eucharist and if it is true Are you really digesting jesus?
Dear tiva82
Shalom.
I feel we should close this chapter. I have requested Wandalie to find another site. To promote sin against the Holy spirit is to lead people directly into the fire of Hell. We can only have pity for such false teachers. When they refuse to listen to objective corrections, their time on this site is over.
pope is the pawn use by satan…