It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Beast about to perform first false miracle?

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 12:28 PM
It is widely claimed that the catholic church is the antichrist of Revelation, and that in the latter days, it/she will perform miracles. Zeitgeist did a decent job of exposing the satanic churchianity of the catholics, carried out in disguise as a religion of Jesus Christ - winter solstice as christmas, the Sabbath moved from Saturday to SUNday, the spring celebration of birth with its easter eggs and cute bunnies became easter rather than the Passover, the adoration of goddess diana became the adoration of mary, and countless other blasphemies.

Most people will be aware that the catholics have exhumed Pardre Pio's 40 year old corpse and have put it on display - some reports say that it will be on display until their pagan festival of Christmas. They have reportedly done this "To check on the state of the body and to carry out all the necessary work to guarantee the best conditions for its conservation," according to the local archbishop, Domenico Umberto D'Ambrosio. There is an estimated 700,000 people who have got tickets to gaze adoringly at the corpse.

Very sickening and odd.

Anyway, people who are interested in biblical prophecy can't help but see the tribulation period approaching.

It wouldn't surprise me if the catholics staged some kind of pretend miracle with this corpse. Maybe the stigmata occurs? Maybe Pio is 'ressurected' and usurps pope benedict as the actual antichrist? Even if nothing happens, it just demonstrates how unholy the catholics are, by revering 'other idols'.

The worst part is that the catholics are deceiving millions of sincere people into a false following of God. If only one person actually reads a bible after enduring this post, it will have been worth it.

Jesus is coming soon.

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 12:48 PM
Just stumbled across your post--serendipity of browsing this site--and believe some comment is in order.

First, the line "Very sickening and odd" is a gem.

As for the rest, well, I just don't want to go there: I don't read regularly on this board but your post struck me as symptomatic of all that people who criticize organized religion criticize it for: fostering division, suspicion of others, and intolerance.

"Demonizing" seems to be the word that best fits, all in all.

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 01:25 PM
It's not intended to demonize anyone who doesn't deserve it, as I said there are no doubt many sincere people involved. Zeitgeist pointed out most of the points I made so it probablt won't come across to most as anything new. The catholic church have been thought of as the whore of babylon for many many years now, it's not something i've just made up.

btw, It's pretty difficult to suggest that the catholic church are the antichrist without casting suspicion on others or being slightly devicive??!!

Anyway, does anyone have any thoughts on the motives for digging up a corpse and putting it on display. Surely that isn't normal common practice?

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 01:46 PM
To add another creepy detail, the corpse was exhumed on March the 2/3rd 2008 in a three hour service, that ended after midnight?

Anyone have any occult knowledge of any relation to that day?

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 10:15 PM
So catholics are all a satanic sect of christianity....well now i've heard it all...

Before you make such obserd comments maybe you should perhaps go to a catholic mass and observe how everything is done before you shoot your mouth off. Is there no decensy anymore.....

Oh and on a side note maybe you should do a little more research on the Zeitgiest video. I guarentee you'll find that more than half of quote's or so called "facts" in that video about religion have been fiddled around with, made up, or made to fit the writer's own idea's and thought.

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 10:25 PM

Originally posted by sinthia

Anyway, does anyone have any thoughts on the motives for digging up a corpse and putting it on display. Surely that isn't normal common practice?

Well it is not really unheard of.
Many Natural History Museums have mummified bodies on display for people to look at. Not to leave out the Egyptian mummies that are very PROMINENTLY displayed.
I just am giving an example of dead bodies on display, to show that it is not the most uncommon practice on the planet, but the bodies are USUALLY very ancient.
I am pretty creeped out that the Catholic Church is digging up one of their own and selling tickets. What is THAT all about anyway? What do they claim to be doing?

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 10:28 PM
Well, its only the heads of the church ie. the pope and his string pullers thats are made of pure evil. "ordinary people" who follow like sheep are the innocent.... so of course mass is going to look like it should look.

pope/black pope and his minions are as i said the only real evil.

they will not win. people will rise when they are ready. in time, people WILL wake up

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 10:32 PM
"The evil pope and his minions huh?" I swear some people are so ignorant it amazes me sometimes...

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 10:55 PM
sorry, no offense but i just want to know how you mean that comment..was that sarcasm?



posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 11:01 PM
reply to post by sinthia
What is your religion?
I'd like to know so i can judge you. I can think of many warped cult like religions you could belong to.

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 11:26 PM
First of all the anti-christ is a person, the whore of babylon is a religion.

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 11:44 PM
I have a suspicion.... Granted, just that, no proof.

But I suspect that religions have been commandeered & hijacked by powerful economic and political entities (and the process continues) to promote feelings of powerlessness among the people. They do this by telling them not to worry, when things get bad, the savior will come.

Well, where was the savior during the holocaust? Where was the savior during so many genocides for so many generations worldwide?

I think the #1 most important message being taught by the politics of religion is that "You cannot be self-reliant. All that is given to you is given to you (and saved) by a ruling authority."

I call BS on that. If anything is to be done, we must do it ourselves. I don't think "saviors" are out there any more than there is a savior in every one of us.

If "Jesus comes back" then fine. But pending that development, I'm going to do everything I can in the meantime to make sure that I have done everything I can. Just in case it isn't time (if it ever will be) I'm going to cover my bases and not make myself another victim of tyranny and genocide.

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 12:18 AM
reply to post by sinthia

Just for the record: bunnies, whether cute or not, have never been a part of any religious tradition, except in non-religious, strictly culturally "Christian" circles (and even that only in Northern America or Anglo-Saxon countries).
In fact, any self-respecting Christian would shun ridiculous folklore of the kind.
(I know I do.)

As for Father Pio, you'll be no doubt glad to learn that there are many, many in the Vatican who hate him almost as much as you do - or more.
No danger of any corpse performing miracles there.

It must be reassuring having a demonic enemy so clearly identified...
Now all you have to do is to banish it into the desert.

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 10:14 AM
Replies to various points directed at me:

As regards catholic mass, I work next door to a catholic church and have witnessed the mass numerous times. Such hocus pocus and ritual is not neccessary to be a Christian. No one should be called father except your father in heaven, not some fella in pompous dress. The congregation of catholics are no doubt mainly sincere and decent people. none the less they can be sincere and deceived at the same time. I encourage you to read Revelation and challenge you to not see many similarites with the beast and the catholic church.

As regards my religion, I would claim to be a member of the Church of God - my authority being the bible itself rather than, as someone else has pointed out the whore of babylon.

I know bunnies have no part of christianity, and that was my point.

Zeitgeist only refutes the manmade church of the catholics and it's off shoot protestant branches. It cannot refute the bible.

Padre Pio - i've seen reports saying that it is common practice for the catholics to exhume their man made saints corpses up, so maybe there is nothing unusual in their terms about such macabre practices. However there does seem to be a bit more who-ha about this one with 700,000 people wanting to view the corpse. Perhaps that's down to his notoriety?

It wouldn't surprise me if they faked a ressurection and pretended that Pio had been in communion with Jesus for the last 40 years, usurping Benedicts power and being the final pope - the individual antichrist - as prophecied by Malachi.

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 11:49 AM
reply to post by Herbal Oli

A hint of sarcasm maybe.... I'm catholic and when people start calling the pope evil and say that catholics are a demonic sect of christianity I get a bit ticked off. It takes pure ignorance and stupidity to say something like that.

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 12:53 PM
It would seem that many organized religions have trouble controlling their elite and flock.

If there are any (false) miracles within the churches anywhere, these would all be suspect according to prophecy. I have my doubts any religion is safe from some type of evil influence and manipulations. Saying that the whole catholic church is evil or the pope himself is the anti-christ is reaching a bit. Misinterpretation, it would seem, is also anti-christ.

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 01:29 PM

Originally posted by alienib

First of all the anti-christ is a person, the whore of babylon is a religion.

First of all, you should understand that scripture can not be fully interpreted through the use of reason and logic alone.

A working interpretation of scripture can only be accomplished by spiritual means.

Just for the sake of illustration that there is a difference between the use of logic and reason to understand spiritual things, and the use of spiritual discernment for the receiving of knowledge, I offer these few versus.

Joh 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Ro 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

1Co 2:9 - 15

But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man ( of only body and soul ) receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are ( received by ) spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual can discern all things, yet he himself is discerned of no man.


Spiritual matters and happenings cannot be analyzed they can only be ascertained, because they require the working of spiritual power, such as the receiving of revelation in the form of word of knowledge, word of wisdom, and/or discerning of spirits.

The most any of us can understand about the truth of any issue, using logic and reason, is only the material factual portion, because full truth, that is all of what is true and can be known about a thing, is constructed of both the physical and spiritual, if God and the spiritual exists in reality.

You are attempting to discover things of the sprit of God when you try and interpret the truth from something like scripture.

The complete meaning of ideas which can be uncovered from words and phrases like the word, "anti-christ," or the phrase, "whore of Babylon," require more than just the use of logic and reason.

The analyzing of words and phrases alone is not a sufficient means for the task of knowing completely what truth might be contained in the words and phrases.

I can give you endless examples of what I am saying.

Take for instance the common phrase, "crime never pays," is that true?

Crime is the most profitable enterprise currently being practiced on earth, all you have to do is look at the war in Iraq and the criminals responsible for it and you will see that they are among the wealthiest people ever to live.

The full truth contained in the phrase can not be understood by the use of reason and logic alone more is required.

I would argue that you are mis-informed to say that the anti-christ is a man, just from a scriptural point of view you could say the anti-christ is a spirit.

1Jo 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

You may mean to say, "the son of perdition," instead of the anti-christ I don't know unless God tells me your mind, but you get the point.

I would also say that you are only partly correct when you claim that a religion is the whore of Babylon.

It is more likely a network of power or rule, such as a government, maybe a combination of both secular and religious orders, such as a fascist theocracy.

One formed from the merging of at least three normally dissociated interests of mankind.

Perhaps the criminal elements within some of the religious, political, and corporate structures, coming together to establish some kind mutually beneficial system of control over the human race.

People make the mistake of thinking the bible can be interpreted by the use of logic alone all the time, that is why religion is so successful in netting the minds of people and then enslaving them to itself.

Which is odd when you think about it rationally, because those who point to the bible as their authority say that it was authored by God and that the original writers received it from God by spiritual means.

It only seems logical to me, that if the scriptures were received by spiritual means, then spiritual means would be required for an accurate interpretation.

You can't reason your way to God.

The notion that you can understand the things of God without God Himself revealing them to you is itself what the bible calls a doctrine of devils, one that I personally think comes directly from anti-christ spirits.

posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 11:34 PM

Originally posted by rbaker20
reply to post by Herbal Oli

A hint of sarcasm maybe.... I'm catholic and when people start calling the pope evil and say that catholics are a demonic sect of christianity I get a bit ticked off. It takes pure ignorance and stupidity to say something like that.

sorry man but if you read back at my post you will notice i didnt call catholics a demonic sect, i dont think i even mentioned the word "catholic".

but yeah high level priests and bishops and popes were always in it for the money sorry man but thats the truth.

if Benedict XVI is not currupt and unholy than i am Twinky Winky, a cute green quadruped from Arcturus that uses its genitals to fly around..somehow


[edit on 27-4-2008 by Herbal Oli]

[edit on 28-4-2008 by Herbal Oli]

posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 12:14 AM
reply to post by sinthia

I was raised in The Church of God myself, and married into a Catholic family who tryed to convert me, they demanded a Catholic ceremony take place after my wedding at my family church, I agreed, and it was a strange ceremony that I felt had nothing whatsoever to do with religion, it was cult like in my opinion. They chanted like something straight out of a Omen movie, they passed out flyers to tell the congregation and guests what they needed money for ( I felt this was in very poor taste at my wedding) , I tried to go to his church on many an occasion, but never once did I hear scripture read or lessons from the bible. And his family, lived life like there was no tommorrow, all drinkers, smokers, fighters, they could not get along with each other, except at mass, then they acted like nothing was wrong, said their hail Mary's asked forgiveness and went back to the drinking. The preist would come over and drink with them. The church had taught my hubby that basically you can do anything you want to, good or bad, as long as you confess you are good to go to heaven. So they lived like a bunch of hethens. I am no longer married to this man. Even divorce was an issue, the whole family tryed to stop me from leaving and divorcing him, his sister said it would damn me to hell if I tryed to pull out of my marrige, that no matter how miserable I was God would never forgive me for divorce. They were a strange group of people. Glad I don't have them in my life anymore.

posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 12:26 AM
Overview of how Catholic faith contradicts the Bible
1. Calling the Priests "Father" is forbidden

FACT: Catholics are taught to call their priest, "Father", as a religious title of respect. Christians in the first century never called their leaders, "father". This first happened hundreds of years later.

Question #1: Does Jesus approve of calling the leaders of the church, "Father"?

Answer: Matthew 23:9 o YES NO o

"Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. Matthew 23:9

2. Praying repetitive words using Rosary beads is forbidden.

FACT: Catholics pray repetitive words with Rosary Beads that were first invented in 1090 AD, by "Peter the Hermit" and made popular by St. Dominic in 1208 AD. Catholics believe that Mary appeared to St. Dominic in 1208 AD, at the church of Prouille and revealed the Rosary Beads to him. From this time, Catholics prayed 15 sets of 10 consecutive "hail Marys" in a row (150 times), in the Rosary. However, in 2003 AD, Pope John Paul added a new set of Mysteries, so now it is 20 sets of 10 "Hail Marys", (200 times in the Rosary, in total.) Catholics will vainly appeal to Psalm 136 that alternates the same phrase 26 times with 26 different blessings God gives us. It is not 26 in a row as with the rosary! This is also a song, not a prayer. Revelation 4:8 has "angels singing" not "men praying".

Click on photo for high resolution

Historical note: Roman Catholics borrowed the idea of praying with beads from the pagan religions who were already using them hundreds of years before: In 456 AD, Hindus are thought to have introduced the concept of praying with beads to the world. The earliest reference to a rosary (boberkhas) is in their "Jain Canon" (456 AD) These boberkhas had various numbers of beads 6,9,12,18,36 (any sub-multiple of 108) Islam (610 AD) uses a rosary of 99 beads, one for each of the names of God. Buddhists have 108 prayer beads on the string. The Rosary is of pagan origin and no Christian prior to 1000 AD used beads to pray.

Question #1: Did Jesus forbid repetitive prayer using Rosary Beads?

Answer: Matthew 6:7 o YES NO o

"And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. Matthew 6:7

3. Virgin Mary

FACT: Roman Catholics are taught the virgin Mary never had sex after Jesus was born and that Jesus had no brothers and sisters. The Pope teaches that Mary is the mediator between God and man. Catholics also engage in more praising of Mary than Jesus Christ himself and actually pray to her to have their prayers answered. Rosary Beads graphically represent how Roman Catholics heap 10 times more praise upon Mary than God himself. Of the 59 total beads of the Rosary, 53 beads are "Hail Marys", but only 6 beads are "Our Father". The Rosary most often ends with a "Hail, Holy Queen" prayer to Mary, not God.

Click here for proof Mary had other children.

Question #1: Did Jesus have brothers and sisters from the womb of Mary?

Answer: Matthew 13:55-56 o YES NO o

"Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? "And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" Matthew 13:55-56
Click here for proof Mary had other children.

Question #2: Did Joseph begin normal sexual relations with his wife after Jesus was born?

Answer: Matthew 1:24-25 o YES NO o

"And Joseph awoke from his sleep and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took Mary as his wife, but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus." Matthew 1:24-25
Click here for proof Mary had other children.

Question #3: The Bible says there is only one mediator between God and man. Is mary that one mediator?

Answer: 1 Timothy 2:5 o YES NO o

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

Question #4: Catholics engage in endless praise of Mary. When a woman praised Jesus’ mother to his face, did Jesus commend encourage this woman to continue praising Mary?

Answer: Luke 11:27-28 o YES NO o

"While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, "Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed." But He said, "On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it."" Luke 11:27-28

4. Every Christian drinks of the communion cup

FACT: Although Roman Catholics are permitted to eat the bread (body) of the Lord’s Supper, they are generally not allowed to drink the wine (blood) of the Lord’s Supper, as any Catholic knows from his own experience from attending Mass. (Except on rare special occasions.) The laity (the people in the pews) are withheld the cup of the Lord and it is usually reserved for church leaders only. Yes there are denominations within the Roman Catholic "communion" where some RC sects actually offer the juice, but most Mass attending Catholics know they rarely drink the cup of wine.

Historical note: Two early popes condemned withholding the cup, (Pope Leo I [died 461 AD] and Pope Gelasius [died 496 Ad]; but in the 12th century the practice was begun, and formally approved by the Catholic Council of Constance in 1415 AD. So for the first 1000 years, the Catholics in the Pews drink the cup, then the Pope changed this apostolic tradition.

Question #1: Did Christ and the apostle Paul command that every Christian should drink of the communion cup?

Answer: Matthew 26:26-28; 1 Corinthians 11:23-28 o YES NO o

To the disciples: "Drink from it, all of you" Matthew 26:27

To the whole church in Corinth: "in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup." 1 Corinthians 11:28

"While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is My body." And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins." Matthew 26:26-28

"For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me." In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup." 1 Corinthians 11:23-28

5. All Christians are saints

FACT: The Pope says only very special dead Catholic people qualify to be called "saints". For example, Pope John Paul II could not make Mother Teresa a saint (official canonization) until after she was dead. The average Catholic in the pew is never called a "saint" dead or alive! In fact if a pew dwelling Catholic started calling himself a "saint", he would be rebuked by the parish priest!

Question #1: Was every living Christian in the church in Corinth called a saint?

Answer: 1 Corinthians 1:2 o YES NO o

"To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours" 1 Corinthians 1:2

Question #2: Did Paul write the book of Ephesians to dead saints?

Answer: Ephesians 1:1 o YES NO o

"Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are at Ephesus and who are faithful in Christ Jesus" Ephesians 1:1

Question #3: Was the average Christian in the church at Philippi called a saint, in distinction to bishops and deacons?

Answer: Philippians 1:1 o YES NO o

"Paul and Timothy, bond-servants of Christ Jesus, To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, including the overseers and deacons" Philippians 1:1

Question #4: Was every Christian living in Rome called to be a saint?

Answer: Romans 1:7 o YES NO o

"to all who are beloved of God in Rome, called as saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." Romans 1:7

6. All Christians are priests

FACT: The Pope decided to reserve the title of "priest" to worn by church leaders only. The average pew dwelling Catholic never refer to themselves as "priests". In fact if a lay Catholic started calling himself a "priest", he would be rebuked by "the parish Priest"!

Question #1: Did Jesus make all Christians to be priests, including the average member in the pew?

Answer: 1 Peter 2:5,9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10 o YES NO o

"you (all Christians) also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. " 1 Peter 2:5

"But you (all Christians) are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; " 1 Peter 2:9

"Jesus has made us (all Christians) to be a kingdom, priests to His God and Father—to Him be the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Amen." Revelation 1:6

"You have made them (all Christians) to be a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign upon the earth." Revelation 5:10

7. Bishops must be Married.

FACT: In 1079 AD celibacy was first enforced for priests and bishops by Pope Gregory VII. Before this time, they were permitted to marry.

Question #1: Does the Bible teach that a bishop (overseer) must be married AND ALSO have children as one of the conditions of being qualified to be a bishop?

Answer: 1 Timothy 3:2-5 o YES NO o

"A bishop, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money. He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?)" 1 Timothy 3:2-5

Question #2: In the very next chapter of the Bible after bishops are told they must be married with children, does the Holy Spirit warn that "forbidding to marry" is a "doctrine of demons"?

Answer: 1 Timothy 4:1-3 o YES NO o

"But the Holy Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth." 1 Timothy 4:1-3

8. Peter was married

FACT: Most Catholics believe that Apostle Peter was the first Pope and was not married. As one Roman Catholic leader said, "if Peter had a wife when he first met Jesus, he got rid of her quick!"

Question #1: Did Peter have a wife?

Answer: Mark 1:30 o YES NO o

"Now Simon’s mother-in-law was lying sick with a fever; and immediately they spoke to Jesus about her." Mark 1:30

Question #2: Did Paul say all the apostles including Peter had a right to be married?

Answer: 1 Corinthians 9:5 o YES NO o

"Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?" 1 Corinthians 9:5

9. Latin Mass forbidden

FACT: For over 1000 years, the Roman Catholic church often conducts their mass services entirely in the Latin language, when no one sitting in the pews understands the Latin language. Most Roman Catholics who have sat through such a Latin Mass service have wondered what is going on. It was not until 1965 AD that the Pope finally understood 1 Cor 14:19 and allowed masses to conducted in the same vernacular language of the local people. (English in North America)

Question #1: Is Latin Mass forbidden in the Bible when no one in the pews understands Latin?

Answer: 1 Corinthians 14:19 o YES NO o

"in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue." 1 Corinthians 14:19

10. Observance of special days condemned

FACT: The Roman Catholic church has invented an entire yearly calendar of non Biblical holy Days like Lent, Easter, Christmas.

Historical note: No one prior to 335 AD celebrated the birthday of Jesus. The word "Christmas" (Christ + Mass) was first used in 1038 AD. Before 335 AD, the pagan cult of Mithra, the Iranian "god of light", had long celebrated December 25 as Mithra’s birthday. December 21, being the winter solace, marked the beginning of days with increasing amount of light, hence December 25 celebrated Mithra’s triumph over darkness. Because the pagan festival that celebrated Mithra’s birthday was so popular, the Roman Catholic church adopted the day, but changed the meaning from the birthday of Mithra, the "god of light", to Christ’s birthday, God the son, "light of the world". The old meaning of December 25 was connected with Mithra’s triumph over physical darkness. The new meaning celebrated Jesus triumph over spiritual darkness. Eventually Christmas became dominant, the Mithra cult went extinct and today this origin is not widely known among Roman Catholics. None of the apostles or the early church celebrated the birthday of Jesus.

Question #1: Did the early Christians celebrate Christmas, Lent and Easter?

Answer: Galatians 4:10-11 o YES NO o

"You observe days and months and seasons and years. I fear for you, that perhaps I have labored over you in vain." Galatians 4:10-11

Question #2: Are Christians told to remember the Lord’s Death every Sunday?

Answer: Acts 20:7 o YES NO o

"On the first day of the week (Sunday), when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to leave the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight." Acts 20:7

11. Worshipping idols, icons and images violates the 2nd commandment.

FACT: Catholics regularly bow down to idols, icons and images of Jesus, Mary and the apostles, kissing the feet of the statues and praying to them.

Historical note: The Pope deleted the 2nd of the 10 commandments so they could use statues & images in worship. They split the 10th commandment on coveting into two commandments so they could still have 10 in number. Don’t believe this? Look at the list of 10 commandments published by the Roman Catholic church! The issue here is not how the Ten Commandments are numbered, rather the issue is that most published lists of the 10 commandments do not include the words, "you shall not for yourself an idol". Open your Catholic Bible and look for yourself!

Question #1: Does the 2nd commandment approve of bowing down and kissing idols?

Answer: Exodus 20:4 o YES NO o

"You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. You shall not worship them or serve them." Exodus 20:4-5

12. Baptism is full immersion in water, not sprinkling.

FACT: The Catholic church baptizes babies by sprinkling a little water on them.

Historical note: Greek work for baptism literally means immersion. There are separate words in Greek for sprinkling, pouring and immersion. Only the Greek word for immersion is ever used for Baptism in the Bible. The first recorded case of sprinkling was in 257 AD to someone on a sick-bed. It was then an exception to the rule and brought about fierce opposition from the whole church. Not until 757 AD did the church accept sprinkling in such sick-bed cases of necessity. It wasn’t until 1311 AD, when the Catholic council of Ravenna, declared that sprinkling was and acceptable substitute for immersion and from that time forward sprinkling replaced immersion in the Roman Catholic church. The Orthodox church refused sprinkling and still immerses to this day.

Question #1: Was Jesus baptized by full immersion in the Jordan River?

Answer: Matthew 3:16 o YES NO o

"After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him" Matthew 3:16

Question #2: When Philip baptized the Eunuch, did both of them go into the water?

Answer: Acts 8:38-39 o YES NO o

"And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him. When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away." Acts 8:38-39

Question #3: Can babies be baptized since they do not first believe?

Answer: Mark 16:16; Acts 8:36-37 o YES NO o

"He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned. Mark 16:16

"As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch said, "Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?" And Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." Acts 8:36-37

Question #4: Can babies be baptized since they do not first repent?

Answer: Acts 2:38 o YES NO o

"Brethren, what must we do?" Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:37-38

13. Original sin is false doctrine

FACT: Catholics say that infants inherit their parent's sin at conception and are therefore spiritually condemned and totally wicked.

Question #1: Is the doctrine of inherited original sin found in the Bible?

Answer: Ezekiel 18:20 o YES NO o

"The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself." Ezekiel 18:20

Question #2: Did Jesus say little children are better models of purity and conduct than adults?

Answer: Matthew 18:2-3 o YES NO o

"And He called a child to Himself and set him before them, and said, "Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:2-3

14. Every Christian can understand the Bible by merely read it.

FACT: Catholics are taught that only the priests can understand the Bible and the common man in the pew cannot understand the Bible without the priests help.

Question #1: Do the scriptures say that when anyone reads the Bible, they can understand for themselves?

Answer: Ephesians 3:4 o YES NO o

"By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ" Ephesians 3:4

15. Catholics are unwilling to defend their faith

FACT: When Roman Catholics are challenged from the Bible to defend their faith, they are unwilling or unable to defend what they believe and say the priest has the answer and never search the truth out for themselves. Priests and Bishops never get permission to have open public Bible discussions with honest Bible students like ourselves. Imagine a local parish priest publicly defending infant baptism against a Christian who taught the practice contradicted the Bible! It never happens! Forget what the Bible says, just trust the priest!

Question #1: Should a Christian be unable to defend what they believe from the Bible without the help of priests?

Answer: 1 Peter 3:15 o YES NO o

"sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence" 1 Peter 3:15

16. Human tradition and man made doctrine is apostasy

FACT: The Pope teaches that he can change what is in the Bible if he wants.

Question #1: Did Jesus say it was OK for man to change what the word of God teaches for man-made Catholic doctrine?

Answer: Mark 7:7-9 o YES NO o

"‘But in vain do they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’ "Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men." He was also saying to them, "You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition." Mark 7:7-9

Conclusion: How the Catholic church views the Bible

Below are the kinds of replies you can expect from a Roman Catholic priest if you ask him about the contents of this Bible study.

Yes I know Matthew 23:9, seems to condemn calling me "Father", but you are not able to understand the Bible like I do.
Yes I know is appears like Jesus condemned the repetitive prayer of the Rosary beads in Matthew 6:7, but Mary appeared to St. Dominic in 1208 AD and revealed to him the Rosary Beads herself!
Yes Matthew 13:55-56 seems to indicate that Jesus had brothers and sisters, but these were the children of Joseph from a previous marriage or just cousins.
Yes, I agree that 1 Timothy 2:5 sounds like Jesus is the only mediator between god and man, but the Pope decided she was indeed also a mediator between God and man

Yes Christ and Paul did command every Christian to drink of the communion cup in Matthew 26:26-28; 1 Corinthians 11:23-28. And Yes I know that two early popes condemned withholding the cup, (Pope Leo I [died 461 AD] and Pope Gelasius [died 496 Ad]; but in the 12th century the practice was begun, and formally approved by the Catholic Council of Constance in 1415 AD.
Was every living Christian in the church in Corinth called a saint?
Yes I know that in the Bible (1 Corinthians 1:2; Ephesians 1:1; Philippians 1:1; Romans 1:7) every Christian was a saint and every saint was a Christian. Yes I agree, the Bible uses the word saint as interchangeably synonymous with being a Christian, but the Roman Catholic church has the power to change the Bible.
Yes I know that in the apostolic church (1 Peter 2:5,9; Revelation 1:6; 5:10), every Christian was a priest and the two terms are used interchangeably synonymous with being a Christian, but the Roman Catholic church decided that only leaders should be called priests.
Yes I know that the Bible appears to teach that 1 Timothy 3:2-5 bishops must be married with believing children, but you can’t even understand the Bible anyway, why do you ask? Just trust me because only Catholic priests can understand the Bible.
Yes I have read 1 Timothy 4:1-3, and is seems to condemn forbidding the marriage of Catholic priests, but the Pope decided that unmarried men are more holy than married men.
Yes I know that Mark 1:30; 1 Corinthians 9:5 say that Peter had a wife 23 years after Christ died on the cross (53 AD), but Pope Gregory VII decided in 1079 AD from that time onward, that church leaders cannot marry.
Yes I know that sitting through a Latin Mass service can be very boring for many Catholics in the pews. And yes I know that 1 Corinthians 14:19 condemns conducting a church service in a language the average member does not understand, but the Pope decided that Latin sounds real holy and has both historical and mystical qualities.
Yes I know the early church did not begin to celebrate Christmas until the 4th century. And yes I know that Galatians 4:10-11 condemns the keeping of such holy days not found in the Bible, but the church at Rome needed a way to convert the pagan worshippers of Mithra, the god of light... and it worked!
Yes I know that Acts 20:7 commands Christians to have weekly communion services and that the early church did not celebrate Easter as is done today, but having a yearly communion service was something later church leaders wanted to add to worship.
Yes I know that the Roman Catholic church deleted the 2nd commandment (Exodus 20:4) in order to hid from the masses God’s condemnation of bowing down and kissing images of Mary and Peter, but Mary revealed herself to us in a vision.
Yes I know that Jesus was baptized by full immersion in the Jordan River (Matthew 3:16), and that sprinkling was not officially approved until 1311 AD, but it sure is more convenient.
Yes I know that babies have no faith and cannot repent, and are therefor not really valid candidates for baptism (Mark 16:16; Acts 8:36-37; Acts 2:38). But the Pope invented the idea of where the faith and repentance that the infant lacks, is exchanged for the faith and repentance of a "God Parent". Yes I know none of this is in the Bible, but the Pope is the "holy see" and he must know what he is doing!
Yes I know Ezekiel 18:20 proves the doctrine of total hereditary depravity (inherited original sin) contradicts the Bible, but you cannot understand the Bible anyway, only the priest can correctly interpret it.
Yes I know that Matthew 18:2-3 teaches that children are better models of purity and conduct than adults, but the Pope teaches that infants are wicked defiled sinners condemned to hell until a Catholic priest baptizes them and removes the curse of original sin.
Yes I know Ephesians 3:4 plainly seems to say that when you read the Bible by yourself, you can have the same insight that the apostle Paul had into spiritual things, but we Catholic priests cannot teach all our false doctrines that contradict the Bible unless we convince you that you can’t understand the Bible unless the priest helps you.
Yes I know that 1 Peter 3:15 teaches every Christian should be able to defend from the Bible what they believe, but isn’t that what us Roman Catholic priests are supposed to do? Do you want to put us out of job and rob us of all our power and control?
Yes I know that human traditions that contradict the Bible are condemned in Mark 7:7-9, but all the doctrines that contradict the Bible which the Pope through up were revealed to him directly by Christ and therefore, although they contradict the Bible, they are divinely approved by Christ himself.
You really shouldn’t be reading the Bible anyway. And while we are talking about it, what else do you want me to teach you about what the Bible says?
Is the Roman Catholic church the church you read about in the Bible?

o YES NO o

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in