Lurking009
Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2018
- Messages
- 638
Preach that truth, bro!
why Christians reject Roman Catholic church
- Thread starter JoChris
- Start date
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,357
Seriously. The Koran was sent A CONFIRMATION of what went before; Mohammad (peace be upon him) was NOT sent to start a new religion (Sura 2:97-98, 3:1-3, 4:47, 5:51, 6:92-94, 6:154-157, 10:37, 12:111, 22:52, 35:31, 46:12, 61:6-7).
Sura 2:97-98
2:97. Say: "Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel - for he brings down the (revelation) to thy heart by God's Will, A CONFIRMATION OF WHAT WENT BEFORE, and guidance and glad tidings for those who believe,-
2:98. Whoever is an enemy to God and His angels and Apostles, to Gabriel and Michael (Daniel 12:1; Rev. 12:7),- Lo! God is an enemy to those who reject Faith."
Sura 3:1-3
3:1. A. L. M. (Almighty. Loving. Merciful.)
3:2. Allah (God). There is no God but He,- the Living, the Self-Existing (YHWH - "I AM"), Eternal.
3:3. It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Koran, CONFIRMING WHAT WENT BEFORE IT and He sent down The Law (of Moses) and The Gospel (of Jesus) BEFORE THIS, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down The Criterion (of Judgment between right and wrong).
Sura 4:47. O ye People of The Book! Believe in what We have (now) revealed, CONFIRMING WHAT WAS (ALREADY) WITH YOU, before We change the face and fame of some (of you) beyond all recognition, and turn them hindwards, or curse them as We cursed the Sabbath-breakers, for the decision of God MUST be carried out.
Sura 5:51. To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, CONFIRMING THE SCRIPTURE THAT CAME BEFORE IT, AND GUARDING IT IN SAFETY (Sura 32:23): so judge between them by what "I AM" hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires (Sura 9:107-111), diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have We prescribed The Law and The Open Way (Matt. 7:13-14). If "I AM" had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His Plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to "I AM"; it is He that will show you the truth of the matters about which ye dispute;
Sura 6:92-94
6:92. And this (Koran) is a Book which We have sent down, bringing blessings, AND CONFIRMING (THE REVELATIONS) WHICH CAME BEFORE IT: that thou mayest warn the Mother of Cities (Jerusalem - Isaiah 1:1, 21; Matt. 23:37, Gal. 4:26) and all around her (just like almost all of the previous Prophets were also told to do). Those who believe in the Hereafter (also) believe this (Book), and they are constant in guarding their prayers.
6:93. Who can be more wicked than one who inventeth a lie against "I AM", or saith, "I have received inspiration," when he hath received none, or (again) who saith, "I can reveal the like of what "I AM" hath revealed"? If thou couldst but see how the wicked (do fare) in the flood of confusion at death! - The angels stretch forth their hands, (saying),"Yield up your souls/Beings: this day shall ye receive your reward,- a penalty of shame, for that ye used to tell lies against "I AM", and scornfully to reject of His Signs!
6:94. And behold! Ye come to us bare and alone as We created you for the first time: ye have left behind you all (the favours) which We bestowed on you: We see not with you your intercessors whom ye thought to be partners in your affairs: so now all relations between you have been cut off, and your (pet) fancies have left you in the lurch!"
Sura 6:154-157
6:154. Moreover, We gave Moses The Book (The Torah), COMPLETING (Our favour) to those who would do right, and explaining ALL things IN DETAIL,- and a GUIDE and a MERCY, that they might believe in the meeting with their Lord.
6:155. And this (Torah) is a Book which We have revealed as a BLESSING: so follow it and be righteous, that YE may receive mercy (Sura 32:23):
6:156. Lest YE should say: "The Book (The Torah) was sent down to two Peoples before us, and for our part, we remained unacquainted with all that they learned by careful study:"
6:157. Or lest YE should say: "If The Book (The Torah) had only been sent down to US, we should have FOLLOWED its guidance BETTER than they (Sura 32:23)." Now then hath come unto YOU a clear (Sign) from your Lord,- and a GUIDE and a MERCY: then who could do MORE WRONG than one who rejecteth "I AM"'s Signs (and The Torah - Bible), and turneth away therefrom? In good time shall We requite those who turn away from Our Signs, with a dreadful penalty, for their turning away.
Sura 10:37-38
10:37. This Koran is not such as can be produced by other than "I AM"; on the contrary IT IS A CONFIRMATION OF (REVELATIONS) THAT WENT BEFORE IT, and a fuller explanation of The Book (Bible - on some issues) - wherein there is no doubt - from The Lord of The Worlds.
10:38. Or do they say, "He forged it"? Say: "Bring then A SURA like unto it, and call (to your aid) anyone you can besides "I AM", if it be ye speak the truth!"
Sura 12:111. There is, in their stories, instruction for men endued with understanding. It is not a tale invented, BUT A CONFIRMATION OF WHAT WENT BEFORE IT,- a detailed exposition of all things, and a Guide and a Mercy to any such as believe.
Sura 22:52. Never did We send an Apostle or a Prophet before thee, but, when he framed a desire, Satan threw some (vanity) into his desire: but "I AM" will cancel anything (vain) that Satan throws in, and "I AM" WILL CONFIRM (AND ESTABLISH) HIS SIGNS (Sura 32:23): for "I AM" is full of Knowledge and Wisdom:
Sura 35:31. That which We have revealed to thee about The Book (Bible) is the Truth,- CONFIRMING WHAT WAS (REVEALED) BEFORE: for "I AM" is assuredly - with respect to His Servants - well acquainted and Fully Observant.
Sura 46:12. And before this, was the Book of Moses (The Torah - The Law) as a guide and a mercy: and THIS BOOK CONFIRMS (IT - THE TORAH) IN THE ARABIC TONGUE; to warn the unjust, and as Good News to those who do right.
Sura 61:6-7
61:6. And REMEMBER, JESUS, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the Apostle of "I AM" (sent) to you, CONFIRMING The Law (which came) before me (the Torah), and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be the Comforter (John 16:7-15)." But when he came to them with Clear Signs (John 14:15-18), they said, "this is evident sorcery (Sura 32:23)!"
61:7. Who doth greater wrong than one who invents falsehood against "I AM" (Sura 6:154-157), even as he is being invited to do His Will? And "I AM" guides not those who do wrong (Satan does).
Unfortunately, we apparently enjoy living in ignorance, and keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again by creating all of these organised religions, e.g. Talmudic Judaism, Roman Catholicism, Protestantism, and the "Islamic" sects/cults, etc., and expecting different results.
ALL corporate fictional organised religion, with its fake teachers, fake priests, fake pastors, fake rabbis, fake imams, and fake gurus, etc. puts up a totally unnecessary barrier between God and men because NONE of them are actually mediators or teachers, nor do they work for God.
Red Sky at Morning
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2017
- Messages
- 14,668
There is a huge flaw in your analysis.
I read the Bible for myself long before anyone came along and told me how to think about it. I became a Christian and accepted that Jesus was God because when I was born again as a young guy, I knew Him. I didn’t believe because I felt like I might get in trouble if I had the wrong idea. I remember listening to my Bible audio cassette and simply asking God to help me know Him.
I would suggest that anyone who has really read the scriptures and opened their heart to allow the Holy Spirit to give them understanding would not come to the conclusions of John Anthony Hill.
Last edited:
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,357
This (planet Earth) IS hell, and we've been held here for the past 6000 years to give us all ample opportunity to come to our senses before it's too late. The flames (aka The Fire) are reserved for the Last Day, when we are all due to be judged according to our works.
That sobering thought should motivate any true believer to do their utmost to learn obedience to our Creator, because all those who are NOT doing His Will are guaranteeing themselves a place in The Fire, with Satan, the popes, the politicians, lawyers, priests, etc.
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,357
You're doing it yet again. Whenever your ignorance of Scripture is exposed, you immediately resort to another baseless personal attack, which is not only totally illogical, but breaks the Commandments (e.g. Exod. 20:16, Matt. 7:1-4).
Anyone genuinely inspired by the Holy Spirit will be shown Christ during His Second Coming, because absolutely no one else can fulfill ALL of the prophecies. Only Father (God) can make that happen (Matt. 11:27-28), and does so based upon how open one is to the Truth (Luke 6:37-38, John 3:34).
Red Sky at Morning
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2017
- Messages
- 14,668
Captain America famously said “I can do this all day” - In terms of an incredulous response to a pretty unconvincing new cult, I am well able to keep on providing one!
The bigger question for me is “should I” and I am increasingly forming the view that I should not.
I am now putting you on “Ignore” not out of anger, contempt or hate, but out of obedience. You have heard the Gospel from many of us and have repeatedly rejected it and tried to twist it into a religion of your own contrivance.
Your blood (spiritually speaking) is no longer on my hands.
The bigger question for me is “should I” and I am increasingly forming the view that I should not.
I am now putting you on “Ignore” not out of anger, contempt or hate, but out of obedience. You have heard the Gospel from many of us and have repeatedly rejected it and tried to twist it into a religion of your own contrivance.
Your blood (spiritually speaking) is no longer on my hands.
Last edited:
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,357
Where does it say ANYWHERE, in plain English (or in the respective languages of Hebrew or Greek) that Jesus is God? You've been provided HUNDREDS of verses that say the exact opposite, proving their is no "trinity", and yet your answer is you are "born again" and thus that is why you can supposedly make such assessments despite the total lack of evidence.
Straight out of Jesus' mouth, Christ proclaimed that Father IS God and is also HIS GOD. He didn't say it just once; Christ said it at least 7 times, including after He left this earthly realm.
Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, MY God (1), MY God (2), why hast Thou forsaken me? (Eno. 89:20; Psalm 22; Isaiah 52:13-54:1; Sura 4:157-8.)
John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and [to] MY God (3), and your God.
Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the Temple of MY God (4), and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of MY God (5), and the name of the city of MY God (6), [which is] New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from MY God (7)*: and [I will write upon him] my NEW name.
Further, Christ left NO DOUBT that His Father and God is greater than ALL, INCLUDING CHRIST.
John 10:29 MY FATHER, which gave [them] me, IS GREATER THAN ALL; and no [man] is able to pluck [them] out of my Father's hand.
John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come [again] unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for MY FATHER IS GREATER THAN I.
GREATER THAN DOES NOT MEAN “EQUAL TO”.
Why not choose to believe Christ and keep the Commandments (God's Law) as Christ Commands instead of believing the exact opposite? It was the RCC who invented the "trinity" in the 4th century A.D., and have been conning "Christians" with it ever since.
No one who contradicts Christ and ignores the Commandments knows or loves Christ. And anyone who does these things to Christ doesn't know or love Father either.
If you mistakenly feel this is being shared in anything but love, then you are wrong. It is meant to be a wake-up call, not only to you but to others who have espoused similar anti-Biblical beliefs.
I'm just stating the obvious. We can't know the exact intention of the Bible authors. In the New Testament period the writers were interpreting scripture, adding on their own layers of meaning for effect. The level of understanding the writings of the New Testament were communicating is a massive study on its own. I read the passages you posted of Saul referring to Adam- I think their point was not to claim Adam as a literal person, but to instead (in the case of 1 Cor) weave an exciting new narrative of a "first" and "second" Adam, a victory of the spiritual body overcoming sin.
It's crazy to me to be having this conversation when we've had over 2000 years of development of Bible exegesis/hermeneutics. By the first centuries the Church Fathers were all espousing ideas on how scripture should be read:
Origen (184-253 CE), due to his familiarity with reading and interpreting Hellenistic literature, taught that some parts of the Bible ought to be interpreted non-literally. Concerning the Genesis account of creation, he wrote: "who is so silly as to believe that God ... planted a paradise eastward in Eden, and set in it a visible and palpable tree of life ... [and] anyone who tasted its fruit with his bodily teeth would gain life?" He also believed that such hermeneutics should be applied to the gospel accounts as well.
Origen, in his Treatise on First Principles, recommends for the Old and New Testaments to be interpreted allegorically at three levels, the "flesh", the "soul", and the "spirit". He states that many of the events recounted in the Scriptures, if they are interpreted in the literal, or fleshly, sense, are impossible or nonsensical. They must be interpreted allegorically to be understood. Some passages have parts that are literally true and parts that are literally impossible. Then, "the reader must endeavor to grasp the entire meaning, connecting by an intellectual process the account of what is literally impossible with the parts that are not impossible but historically true, these being interpreted allegorically in common with the part which, so far as the letter goes, did not happen at all."
I think this subject is vast and really interesting. You should go read for yourself the last 2000 years of Biblical interpretation, maybe we could have a more meaningfull discussion than "wHy CRitanz reject the RCC" lol.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegorical_interpretation_of_the_Bible
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_literalism
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,357
The following is the RCC's admission of that they invented the "trinity":-
“Our opponents sometimes claim that no belief should be held dogmatically which is not explicitly stated in scripture ... But the Protestant Churches have themselves accepted such dogmas, AS THE TRINITY, for which there is no such precise authority in the Gospels,” — (Assumption of Mary, Life magazine, Oct 30, 1950, p. 51)
Source: http://www.trinitytruth.org/the-trinity-doctrine-exposed.html#Part15
From the Athanasian Creed: "Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity...
...This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved."
"The doctrine of the Trinity is the central Catholic Dogma, that Catholics are obliged to believe."
“He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity.”
-the Athanasian Creed
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasian_Creed
“Our opponents sometimes claim that no belief should be held dogmatically which is not explicitly stated in scripture ... But the Protestant Churches have themselves accepted such dogmas, AS THE TRINITY, for which there is no such precise authority in the Gospels,” — (Assumption of Mary, Life magazine, Oct 30, 1950, p. 51)
Source: http://www.trinitytruth.org/the-trinity-doctrine-exposed.html#Part15
From the Athanasian Creed: "Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity...
...This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved."
"The doctrine of the Trinity is the central Catholic Dogma, that Catholics are obliged to believe."
“He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity.”
-the Athanasian Creed
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasian_Creed
Last edited:
A Freeman
Superstar
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2019
- Messages
- 8,357
Question:
IF the "trinity" is real, then where is the Holy Spirit in either John 1:1-2 or in John 17:3?
John 1:1-2
1:1 In the Beginning was the Word (Truth - in Hebrew is Nazir), and the Truth was with God (NOT with Lucifer/Satan the Devil), and the Word was God.
1:2 The same was in the Beginning with God.
John 17:3 And THIS is Life Eternal, that they might KNOW Thee the ONLY True God, and Christ the Saviour, whom Thou hast sent.
If the "trinity" is a three but not three, one but not one god that consists of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, then why is the Holy Spirit absent from the description of who was with God in the beginning, and also absent from the requirements for Life Eternal according to Christ?
IF the "trinity" is real, then where is the Holy Spirit in either John 1:1-2 or in John 17:3?
John 1:1-2
1:1 In the Beginning was the Word (Truth - in Hebrew is Nazir), and the Truth was with God (NOT with Lucifer/Satan the Devil), and the Word was God.
1:2 The same was in the Beginning with God.
John 17:3 And THIS is Life Eternal, that they might KNOW Thee the ONLY True God, and Christ the Saviour, whom Thou hast sent.
If the "trinity" is a three but not three, one but not one god that consists of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, then why is the Holy Spirit absent from the description of who was with God in the beginning, and also absent from the requirements for Life Eternal according to Christ?
Red Sky at Morning
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2017
- Messages
- 14,668
Hermeneutics? A good topic!
“Allegorisation is spiritualisation of a text. If it isn’t warranted in the text, you shouldn’t try to use it, otherwise you get nothing but false doctrines”.
~ Walter Martin
Is Jesus a loaf? Hermeneutics for Dummies!
Great talk by Walter Martin! Literal and Figurative Language - how to avoid being dumb! About 25 minutes in, he addresses one of the most common errors people make when interpreting statements in the Bible. I think Transubstantiation is the most famous example of this...
JoChris
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2017
- Messages
- 6,168
From memory, John Anthony Hill's evangelist never mentions the third **person** of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit. Yet another clear sign the deluded JAH, the man who actually claims to be Jesus reincarnated is NOT a Christian.
Red Sky at Morning
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2017
- Messages
- 14,668
Jesus Reincarnated?!
Why does JAH not try to add the Hindu Vedas to the Qur’an in the King of Kings Bible as well?? Perhaps in the 2022 revision!?
JoChris
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2017
- Messages
- 6,168
Good question. He managed to add UFOology to his mishmash of pseudo-Christian/ sorta-Islam (John Anthony Hill mustn't have read the small print of Hadiths AT ALL)... why not other religions? https://jahtruth.net/ufos.htm
Since he was born in Sheffield UK he should have learnt about paganism. Why not a bit of runes and winter solstice on the side to really add some interest...
Red Sky at Morning
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2017
- Messages
- 14,668
In terms of Church history, I find it interesting to note that there are strong parallels between the church at Pergamum and the post-Constantine Catholic church and between Thyatira and the Catholic church of the Middle Ages. It would appear that Jesus recognised believers within both of these churches but had dire rebukes for them.
vigilantcitizenforums.com
For the avoidance of Protestant smugness, it would appear that the letter has some hard prophetic words for the post-Reformation church at Sardis as well!
2000 Years of Church History Foretold? The Seven Churches of Revelation 2 & 3
At present there is much discussion about which denomination or perspective on Christianity represents a correct Biblical understanding. I find it intriguing that in the Book of Revelation the letters to the Seven Churches of chapters 1&2 correspond to distinct eras of church history in a way in...
For the avoidance of Protestant smugness, it would appear that the letter has some hard prophetic words for the post-Reformation church at Sardis as well!
Last edited:
Red Sky at Morning
Superstar
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2017
- Messages
- 14,668
This verse from Mark 7 really doesn’t concern you then?
“13making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.”
monkeylove
Rookie
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2019
- Messages
- 90
The RCC does not argue that tradition is equal to Scriptures. It argues that its doctrines are based on Tradition and Scriptures.
I add that Scriptures are based on Tradition because the selection of the books that would make up the former is based on the latter. In short, what determined the Biblical canon is the Council of Rome.
monkeylove
Rookie
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2019
- Messages
- 90
What's the point in sharing personal experiences? in a forum with no ID verification, you can make anything up about yourself.
The topic is that the RCC is wrong because it's "unbiblical":
why Christians reject Roman Catholic church
Unlike Roman Catholics like to tell us, the RC teaches a great deal that is UNbiblical. No mention of purgatory in 66 books of bible. Excessive honour to Mary and saints. Works righteousness. Multiple extra biblical teachings and traditions. No knowledge of the Gospel. That is the tip of the...
The point is illogical because the selection of the Biblical canon is itself unbiblical!
monkeylove
Rookie
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2019
- Messages
- 90
The lies that you post are based on the totally irrational assumption that the Biblical canon itself is based on the Bible!
The truth is that the books that would make up the Bible involved a lengthy process culminating in the Council of Rome, and it involved arguments that are obviously outside Scriptures. And those arguments come from a Tradition that's attacked because it's not seen in the same Bible.