tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-91022134515677593122024-02-19T04:37:33.061-05:00Pro Una Fides: In Defense of the One True FaithPro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.comBlogger80125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-40272590708547582892014-07-16T09:48:00.002-04:002014-07-22T08:30:58.134-04:00Throwing Down the Gauntlet: Episode 3, Part 2<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">This is the second part of my apologetic analysis of John MacArthur's skewed and often biased view of what Catholicism is. </span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/5oLtB0WI57o?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">4:20-5:02 - <i>“It’s pretty remarkable that when the out-going Pope, Ratzinger,
resigns because it is the only way he can clean out the Vatican. He designated
what existed in the Vatican as ‘the filth.’…he had been complicit in it for so
long, that the only way for him to get rid of it was for him to resign.”<o:p></o:p></i></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="background: white; line-height: 115%;">“…</span></i><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">How often do we celebrate only ourselves, without even
realizing that he is there! How often is his Word twisted and misused! What
little faith is present behind so many theories, so many empty words! How much
filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood,
ought to belong entirely to him! How much pride, how much self-complacency!
What little respect we pay to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, where he waits
for us, ready to raise us up whenever we fall!...”<o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background: white; line-height: 115%;">- </span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/2005/via_crucis/en/station_09.html"><span style="background: white; color: #0b5394; line-height: 115%;">Pope Benedict XVI, <i>Easter 2005 Via Crucis, </i>Station #9</span></a><span style="background: white; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">“Yes, it
is a great crisis, we have to say that. It was upsetting for all of us.
Suddenly so much filth. It was really almost like the crater of a volcano,
out of which suddenly a tremendous cloud of filth came, darkening
and soiling everything, so that above all the priesthood
suddenly seemed to be a place of shame and every priest was under the
suspicion of being one like that too.” <o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><a href="http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/features/2010/11/24/light-of-the-world-an-extract-on-the-abuse-crisis/"><span style="background: white; line-height: 115%;">- <span style="color: #0b5394;">Pope Benedict XVI,
Interview with Peter Seewald on <i>Light of
the World</i>, 2010</span></span></a><span style="background: white; color: #0b5394; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">In context,
Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI stated that “the filth” that was in the church was –
specifically speaking – those priests who had committed sexual abuse AND NOT,
the priesthood at large. Mr. MacArthur is painting with a broad brush here; he
is literally stating that the vast majority of priests are, not only tormented
and miserable but, pedophiles and homosexuals as well. Such gross
generalization is unbecoming of his argument due to the fact that, as I have
already pointed out in the <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2014/06/throwing-down-gauntlet-episode-3-part-1.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">previous post</span></a>, there is a virtual </span><a href="http://www.newsweek.com/priests-commit-no-more-abuse-other-males-70625"><span style="color: #0b5394; line-height: 115%;">statistical similarity</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"> between Catholic clergy who commit
sex acts with minors and heterosexual men at large. This statistic was even
mentioned by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI in </span><a href="http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/full-text-of-benedict-xvis-letter-to-atheist-odifreddi"><span style="color: #0b5394; line-height: 115%;">a 2013 letter</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"> addressed to Piergiorgio Odifreddi,
a militant atheist who wrote Pope Benedict in 2011 about some questions he had concerning
Benedict’s writings from 1968 to the present. In what can truly be called a
remarkable apologetic writing, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI stated the following
regarding the sexual abuse within the clergy: <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">“<span style="background: white;">Neither
is it comforting to know that, according to research, the percentage of priests
who commit these crimes isn't any higher than the percentage of other similar
professions. Regardless, one shouldn't present this deviation as if it were
something specific to Catholicism.”<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background: white; line-height: 115%;">You hear that Mr. MacArthur? I</span></span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 18.399999618530273px;">n 2013 t</span><span style="background: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">he Pope stated the actual and
verifiable truth that the number of those who commit pedophilia within the Catholic Church is
consistent with that of men of all other professions. Therefore Mr. MacArthur,
I must ask: if about 3% of priests violate minors and, statistically speaking,
3% of all other men do as well, what are your thoughts on the men in your
congregation who too are “filthy?” Are they, as you stated, “tragic and
desperate” because of the unnatural imposition of a forced celibacy like the
Catholic priesthood? If not, then what would explain their sexual inclination
towards children? In 2008, your weekly audience was 8,258, </span><a href="http://www.sermoncentral.com/articleb.asp?article=Top-100-Largest-Churches3" style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background: white; color: #0b5394; line-height: 115%;">ranking you #68 out
of the top 100</span></a><span style="background: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;"> </span>Largest Churches in America, if that number has stayed the
same since 2008 then, mathematically speaking, this means that to this day you
have at least 248 pedophiles in your weekly sermons. Do you speak to these
“filthy” parishoners in the same manner as you are speaking about Catholic
priests, that is, in a tone unbecoming of a pastor? Do you speak down to them
in the same fashion as you are speaking about the Catholic priesthood? Do you
mock them and belittle them because of their disordered behavior? Since you are
part of the “true church” and you are offering up “true Christianity,” how
would you explain the 3% of men in your church who are – statistically speaking
– violating minors? Or, are there no such people in your congregation?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGjLLdjKdjzdqHTHKrqt_REyXpjCLkPakHE7RAzjPGCeq-2cvi50RI_jYgXIPUrRGmnQJ2GmLIRU616_3oB_8Jr6knWpnrwZo8jsLzkRvH6iE6GH7HGDPIQZ_ulMuH1sAQxo-mD9RrD5Q/s1600/Iranian+President+Mahmoud+Ahmadinejad.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGjLLdjKdjzdqHTHKrqt_REyXpjCLkPakHE7RAzjPGCeq-2cvi50RI_jYgXIPUrRGmnQJ2GmLIRU616_3oB_8Jr6knWpnrwZo8jsLzkRvH6iE6GH7HGDPIQZ_ulMuH1sAQxo-mD9RrD5Q/s1600/Iranian+President+Mahmoud+Ahmadinejad.jpg" height="202" width="320" /></span></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: small;">There are no homosexuals in Iran...or at Grace Community Church; and there are definitely no pedophiles there or in Iran either.</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">The fact of
the matter is that there will always be wolves among the sheep. Judas is plain
biblical proof of this fact. Amazingly what Mr. MacArthur doesn’t state is
that, during the final 2 years of his pontificate, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI
defrocked </span><a href="http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/benedetto-xvi-benedict-xvi-benedicto-xvi-31348/"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">close to 400 priests</span></span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"> on grounds of sexual abuse of a
minor! <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Hardly the
act of someone who was “complicit in it for so long.” And why does Mr.
MacArthur state that, that Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI was complicit with the child
molestation? Simply put, before he became Pope, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was
head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in Rome and, it
was his job to know of all of the allegations brought before any ordained
religious person in the Catholic Church. Or, at least, that’s what those who
wish to tarnish the good work of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI would have you
believe.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In reality,
while he was the head of the CDF, from 1982-2005, the CDF <b><u>WAS NOT</u></b> the office which handled sexual abuse allegations.
It wasn’t until 2001, that Cardinal Ratzinger convinced then Pope St. John Paul
II to transfer all sexual abuse cases to the CDF. Prior to 2001, the CDF’s
involvement in sexual abuse was rare and very limited to priests who violated
the Sacraments; in particular, the CDF became involved in the sexual abuse case
of Marcial Maciel – a notorious priest who sexually abused boys – only <a href="http://natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2005a/010705/010705i.php"><span style="color: black;">after</span><span style="color: #0b5394;"> several
men came forward with the help of a canon layer</span></a> and stated that Maciel had
abused his authority by sexually abusing young men as well as abusing his
priestly capacity by absolving and forgiving them of their sins through the
confessional, which was a clear violation of <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P54.HTM"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Canon Law 1378</span></a>. The
same thing occurred in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_abuse_scandal_in_Catholic_archdiocese_of_Milwaukee#Lawrence_Murphy_case"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Lawrence
Murphy</span></a>, a priest who was using the Sacrament of Penance to absolve his
victims. In both of these cases, the canonical and civil statute of limitations
had run its course but, when Cardinal Ratzinger found out that they violated the sacrament and their priestly duties, he concluded that there was no
statute of limitations on the offenses against Murphy or Maciel. Additionally, one of the
things that Cardinal Ratzinger did as head of the CDF, was to lengthen the
statute of limitation for sexual abuse allegations from 5 years to 10 years
after the victims 18<sup>th</sup> birthday. Article 5 the Substantive Norms
listed in <i><a href="http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/churchdocs/SacramentorumAndNormaeEnglish.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Sacramentorum
Sanctitatis Tutela</span></a></i> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">Criminal action for
delicts reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is
extinguished by prescription after ten years</span>…prescription begins to run
from the day on which the minor completes the eighteenth year of age.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">By
extending the time limit, Cardinal Ratzinger’s directive actually facilitated the
Church in her proceedings against clerical sex offenders due to the fact that
previously hampered prosecutions could now be looked at within a new time
frame. Additionally, </span><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">Sacramentorum Sanctitatis Tutela</span></i><span style="line-height: 115%;"> required bishops to
report all cases of clergy sexual abuse to the CDF which stopped the common
practice of simply sending priests to therapy and reassigning them. So important is
this provision that our current Pope, Pope Francis, <span style="color: #0b5394;"><a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/pope-meets-catholics-sexually-abused-clergy-24448116"><span style="color: #0b5394;">reiterated
this Ratzinger-borne decree</span></a> </span>ahead of his <a href="http://time.com/2961974/pope-francis-sex-abuse-catholic/"><span style="color: #0b5394;">meeting with
sexual abuse victims</span></a> just recently. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Upon
becoming Pope, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger did more to help heal the wounds inflicted by the
wolves of the church than any modern day Pope:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">-
He asked for frequent <a href="http://www.vatican.va/resources/resources_presidente-conf-ep-tedesca_en.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">updated
reports from the German bishops</span></a> as to what and how they were doing to address
sexual abuse in their archdioceses. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">-
He <a href="http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0120/126556-abuse/"><span style="color: #0b5394;">met with the Irish
bishops</span></a> in order to address the sexual abuse allegations in Ireland.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">-
He spoke openly, bluntly and, clearly about the sexual abuse <a href="http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=87664"><span style="color: #0b5394;">to the American
bishops</span></a> during his visit to the U.S. in 2008.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">-
He has met with victims of sexual abuse both privately and publically to
apologize on behalf of the Church in the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-07-19/full-text-of-pope-benedicts-apology-to-sex-abuse/444716"><span style="color: #0b5394;">U.S</span></a>,
<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jul/19/catholicism.religion" style="color: #0b5394;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Australia</span></a>, <span style="color: #0b5394;"><a href="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2010/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20100319_church-ireland_en.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Ireland</span></a> </span>and, <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/apr/18/pope-benedict-catholic-abuse-malta"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Malta</span></a>.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">-
He met with abuse victims on <u>numerous</u> occasions.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">- He help set up the <a href="http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/2010/09/papal-message-child-protection-officers.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">child protection officers</span></a> in England and Wales.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">- The current <a href="https://www.virtus.org/virtus/virtus_description.cfm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">VIRTUS training program in the U.S.A.</span></a> came about when the United State's bishops responded to Pope Benedict's call to put safeguards in place </span></span><span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;">to help children and at-risk adults.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"> </span><span style="line-height: 115%;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Indeed,
one could successfully argue that Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI’s pontificate was
pre-ordained by God to address the sexual abuse crisis that had been bubbling
up in the Church for several decades - a crisis that came to a head during his pontificate. But, what about the charge that MacArthur makes that the only way for </span></span><span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;">Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI to purge "the filth" was by resigning from the papacy?</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;">While it is true that, once a Pope dies, his whole staff within the Curia also leaves, it has never been officially stated that Benedict left because of this - the official reason for his departure was due to health reasons. But, let's just entertain MacArthur's presupposition and, if for only a moment, let's say that Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI left to get rid of those within the Vatican walls that hid or supported sexual abuse of a minor.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;">Knowing what we know now about how hard he fought both as a Cardinal and Pope to help the Church and the victims of sexual abuse, would his resignation from the Papacy in order to "clean house" really have been a bad thing? If Mr. MacArthur is right and he did in fact leave for that reason, doesn't his abdication actually stand for something good? Honestly ask yourself: what kind of a man leaves the highest available position of his profession for the greater good? The answer is simple: only a man who truly believes that what he is doing is right would do such a bold move. Only a humble and honorable man would ever even think of letting go of such a prize as the papacy! How many men throughout history have coveted that office for their own nefarious gains and yet, Benedict let it go in order to unburden the Church from those who would seek to destroy her? If Benedict's only recourse was to secede from the office of the Papacy, then how much stronger is the Catholic case made in Matthew 16:18, where Jesus establishes the Church upon Peter and states that nothing shall ever prevail against it? To be sure, if Mr. MacArthur's hypothesis is to be believed then, Benedict's resignation actually bolsters the Catholic claim that the Church is protected and guided by the Holy Spirit and, if in order to protect the Church a Pope must resign then, the Holy Spirit must've moved Ratzinger to do such a thing. In other words, the Bride of Christ was shielded from evil men because one man surrendered himself to the will of the Holy Spirit.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;"><br /></span></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhayEBwcgvCnpcf1s6Yvvn-hP6QjsQ6tZzbMHenP9hyq-1SO0TVlwu3Vz2ekSBg8TNwdtKMqwxZeyb-U9icxm7TamoAO-_Cd8DS_JjyKoSFyx9UbDYy-pl_saeSxoWvLe-dGEE7EodDjFs/s1600/pope-benedict-1-sized.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhayEBwcgvCnpcf1s6Yvvn-hP6QjsQ6tZzbMHenP9hyq-1SO0TVlwu3Vz2ekSBg8TNwdtKMqwxZeyb-U9icxm7TamoAO-_Cd8DS_JjyKoSFyx9UbDYy-pl_saeSxoWvLe-dGEE7EodDjFs/s1600/pope-benedict-1-sized.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Pope Benedict XVI, a.k.a., "God's Rottweiler." Rottweiler characteristics include: loyalty, strength, a natural instinct to protect their families and, ferocious in their defense. A very apt description of our Pope Emeritus! </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">6:09-7:18 - <i>“[The Catholic Church’s] deception lies in the fact that it’s an
apostate, corrupted, heretical, false kind of Christianity, it is the kingdom
of Satan wearing a Christian mask. The true church of the Lord Jesus has always
understood this, it’s always understood that Catholicism began to form itself
in the 4<sup>th</sup> century, all the way to the Reformation – even through
what was known as the Dark Ages, say from 400 to 1500 leading up to the
Reformation – genuine Christian believers always set themselves against the
heretical system that was developing, that became known as the Roman Catholic
Church. It was always rejected by the true church and the Roman system was
always going after Huguenots and, um, Waldensians and, um, Anabaptists, those
who took issue with the system in favor of the truth.”</i><o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">While I have
already done numerous post that clearly depict Catholic beliefs prior to the 4</span><span style="font-size: x-small; line-height: 15.333332061767578px;">th</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> century<span style="color: red;">*</span>, I believe that, among all of the things that are truly Catholic,
nothing else screams Catholicism more than the Mass. If we did an inventory of
all of the things that Protestants simply don’t understand or, better stated,
misunderstand, the Mass would certainly be on top of that list. So, in order
for me to debunk Mr. MacArthur’s claim that Roman Catholicism “began to form
itself the 4</span><span style="font-size: x-small; line-height: 15.333332061767578px;">th</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> century,” let us look at how the Early Christians
worshiped in the year 155 A.D.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">In that
year, St. Justin Martyr wrote his </span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm"><i><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">First Apology</span></span></i></a><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> to the Roman Emperor Antonius Pius
(b.86 A.D. – d.167 A.D.) in order to set straight the record of who the true
Christians were and what they believed in, primarily due to the fact that they were being
unjustly persecuted and maligned by people within the Roman empire. In what is hallmark of apologetical works, the <i>First
Apology</i> rationally and vehemently defends the true Christian faith; St.
Justin Martyr runs through a slew of defenses ranging from </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.v.html"><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Christians being called “atheists”</span></span></a><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> for not believing in the pagan Roman
gods to, </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.ix.html"><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">not worshiping idols</span></span></a><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, the </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.xviii.html"><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Resurrection</span></span></a><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.xxix.html"><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">celibacy</span></span></a><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, and even, the prophecies of </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.xxxvii.html"><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">God the Father</span></span></a><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.xxxviii.html"><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">God the Son</span></span></a><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> and, </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.xxxix.html"><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">God the Holy Spirit</span></span></a><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">; that last one is very interesting
to note since the doctrine of the Trinity wouldn’t be made into Church doctrine
for over 200 years and yet, it is clearly seen by the early Christians that
somehow, there is a <i>tri-unity</i> of God which manifests itself and has reveled itself
to the Church and her believers!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">When one
goes through St. Justin Martyr’s seminal work, there is one chapter towards the end that many
Protestants tend to over look or, skip entirely, and that is the </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.lxvii.html"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">67</span>th<span style="font-size: 11pt;"> chapter</span></span></span></a><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> which is entitled, “<i>Weekly Worship of Christians</i>.” If in fact Mr. MacArthur’s church is
the “true church” and the way they worship at Grace Community Church is “true
worship” then, it is only fitting that, St. Justin Martyr’s view of how the
Christians worshiped God in 155 A.D. should be strikingly similar to how
MacArthur leads his worship services. So, let’s see what Justin Martyr wrote in
the early half of the 2</span><span style="line-height: 115%;">nd<span style="font-size: 11pt;"> century in regards to how the Christians
honored, praised and gave homage to the Lord (with </span><b style="font-size: 11pt;"><i>my emphasis</i></b><span style="font-size: 11pt;">):<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background: white; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“…And on
the day called<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Sunday,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>all who live in cities or in the
country gather together to one place, and <b>the
memoirs of the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></b></span></i><b><i><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">apostles<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white;"> </span></span><span style="background: white;">or the writings of the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span>prophets<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white;"> </span></span><span style="background: white;">are read</span></span></i></b><i><span style="background: white; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, as long as time<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>permits; <b>then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and
exhorts to the imitation of these<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></b></span></i><b><i><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">good<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white;"> </span></span><span style="background: white;">things</span></span></i></b><i><span style="background: white; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">. Then we all<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>rise together and<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">pray<span style="background: white;">, and, as we before said, when our<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span>prayer<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white;"> </span></span><span style="background: white;">is ended,<b> bread and<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>wine<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>and water are brought, </b>and the
president in like manner<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>offers</span>
prayers<span class="apple-converted-space"><span style="background: white;"> </span></span><span style="background: white;">and
thanksgivings, according to his ability,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>and
the people assent, saying<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span>Amen<span style="background: white;">; <b>and
there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks
have been given</b>,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>and to those
who are absent a portion is sent by the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span>deacons…<span style="background: white;">Sunday<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>is
the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day
on which<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span style="background: white;">God, having wrought a change
in the darkness and matter, made the world; and<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Jesus Christ<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>our<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Savior<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>on the same day rose from the dead.
For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the
day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>apostles<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>and<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to
you also for your consideration.”</span> <o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">St. Justin
Martyr starts off by saying that the early Christians worshiped on Sundays,
which is in perfect accordance with what Scripture states in <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+20%3A7&version=KJV"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Acts
20:7</span></a> as well as tithing on Sundays mentioned in <span style="color: #0b5394;"><a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+16%3A1-2&version=KJV">1
Corinthians 16:1-2</a> </span>by St. Paul. Plus, we also have Traditional-Scriptural support for St. Justin Martyr from St. Ignatius of Antioch. In <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.iii.ix.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">chapter 9 of his
Epistle to the Magnesians</span></a>, written around 117 A.D., St. Ignatius states
that:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“If, therefore, those who were
brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new
hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the
Lord’s Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death…”</span></i><br />
<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The term
that one must notice here is that St. Ignatius uses the term “Lord’s Day” as
being the new day of the new Sabbath, he is the first Early Church Father to
use this term only after St. John the Apostle stated it in </span><a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+1%3A10&version=KJV" style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Chapter
1 verse 10 of his Apocalypse</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">.</span><span style="color: red; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">**</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> Therefore, at the very least, we can say
that St. Justin Martyr believed in what St. John, who was an Apostle of Christ and an author of the New Testament writings, believed in; as well as also observing what the
early church before him taught about keeping the new Sabbath day. All in all, such adherence makes him St. Justin Martyr a valuable
eyewitness to Christian history. </span><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">But, unfortunately for Mr. MacArthur and all other
Protestant denominations, the worship service as described by this eyewitness of Christian history and of the early Church and of the
early Christians, was 100% Roman Catholic!</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">To begin
with, St. Justin Martyr states that the worship service is constituted from two main parts: one part to read the “memoirs” of the apostles and of the prophets and another in which bread and wine are brought in and distributed amongst the
Christians. If we look at the <a href="http://catholic-resources.org/ChurchDocs/Mass-RM3.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Order of the Mass</span></a> we can clearly see that the Roman Catholic Mass contains the
<a href="http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/liturgy-of-the-word/"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Liturgy of the Word</span></a> – in which there are Old Testament and New Testament
readings – and, the <a href="http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/order-of-mass/liturgy-of-the-eucharist/"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Liturgy of the Eucharist</span></a> – in which bread and wine are
offered, prayed over and then dispensed. Additionally we know that what St.
Justin Martyr describes is a Mass due to the fact that, after the writings of
the apostles and the Old Testament prophets have been read, there is a homily - the sermon that follows the reading of the Gospel at Mass - and,
after that, the president (think priest) prays over the offering and, at the conclusion
of his prayer, the faithful all say Amen or, as it is commonly called today,
the “great Amen.” <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKuHD60MtC2Neds7j5mKmJqNoX9lDkS_zdOFZIUK0JVx_GYnplvzYA4dM9972Mi0ZkSh2GygcgzWQNdCuyK4T8XojmKQ4SFvv4MxZJLl5K6JIiq8aYgPrjcHLxBnq18Y7egUIvNnHZDe0/s1600/Justin_Martyr_Apologies.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKuHD60MtC2Neds7j5mKmJqNoX9lDkS_zdOFZIUK0JVx_GYnplvzYA4dM9972Mi0ZkSh2GygcgzWQNdCuyK4T8XojmKQ4SFvv4MxZJLl5K6JIiq8aYgPrjcHLxBnq18Y7egUIvNnHZDe0/s1600/Justin_Martyr_Apologies.jpg" height="320" width="256" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I debated the Roman philosopher Crescens and won. He got jelly and told the Roman prefect who told me to offer sacrifice to the Roman gods. I told him to "shove it" because the only real sacrifice is that one done at the Mass. I was then beheaded. No prob tho, that single act of martyrdom made me a Saint. Bite me Crescens. #hatersgonnahate<br />
<br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">But, some
cynics might say, “No! You are wrong! The early Christians didn’t literally think that Jesus
was in the bread and wine! They understood those to be symbolic representations of Jesus' sacrifice and not a Sacrament!” To which we can look at </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.lxvi.html"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Chapter 66 of <i>First Apology</i></span></span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;"> </span>aptly entitled, “<i>Of the Eucharist</i>,”
in which he states (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b>):<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">“And this food is called among us <span style="background: #FDFEFF; color: #001320;">E</span></span></i><i><span style="background: rgb(253, 254, 255); color: #001320; line-height: 115%;">ὐ</span></i><i><span style="background: rgb(253, 254, 255); color: #001320; line-height: 115%;">χαριστία</span></i><i><span style="line-height: 115%;"> [the Eucharist], of which<b> no one is
allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are
true</b>, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of
sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. <b>For
not as common bread and common drink do we receive these</b>; but in like manner as
Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both
flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the
food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and
flesh by transmutation are nourished, <b>is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who
was made flesh</b>. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are
called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that
Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in
remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having
taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to
them alone...”<o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;">Take a good hard look at the words of a martyred saint and note at just how Catholic the belief in the Eucharist is! St. Justin Martyr here states that the bread and wine <u>are the body and blood of Jesus</u> and, more importantly, he states that this command was given to the Apostles. In other words, he states that ONLY the true Christians – “those who believe those things which are taught to be true” – can partake of this meal in which the Real Presence of Christ is present and, all of this true Christian worship was handed down by the Apostles, undoubtedly, through Sacred Tradition.</span><br />
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Additionally, we know with 100% certainty that the weekly worship of Christians was a Sacrament because St. Justin Martyr states this to be the case in the <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.lxv.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">65th chapter</span></a> of <i>First Apology</i> which is entitled, <i>"Administration of the Sacraments."</i> In it he states the following:</span></span><br />
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;"><i>"There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands...And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion."</i></span><br />
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
It is clear to see that, according to what St. Justin Martyr states in 3 chapters of his book (chapters 65-67) there is: 1) an administration of a Sacrament, 2) bread and wine becoming the body and blood of Christ and, 3) that this is the way that the Christians worship every Sunday. And so now we come to the big question, <span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">does
Mr. MacArthur believe in worshiping this way? That is, does he worship like
the original Christians and the Roman Catholic Church worship to this day?
Nope, not at all. The </span><a href="http://www.gty.org/blog/B130228"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">official Grace Community Church’s
stance</span></span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"> on the Mass is that it is a heresy! And as far as MacArthur is concerned, much like all other Protestant denominations,
</span><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4iGMZ12_Po"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">the Supper of the Lord it is simply
“symbolic</span></span></a></span><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">.”<span style="color: red;">*** </span></span></span><br />
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: red;"><br /></span></span></span>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxBmC-TgNu6QT0dkOFGvWQn3FnZCrh8FhrUbsfcDfJ1P04AXSr9Sf44ZDHXyIY1twJojT5WNx4K_Fsk3jJH6lN-rpSIA03t36WHgGLneDqo1T2vFMXsoHGa2Vf8kAjLHtz-q5nOUSLhiQ/s1600/jesus-meme.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxBmC-TgNu6QT0dkOFGvWQn3FnZCrh8FhrUbsfcDfJ1P04AXSr9Sf44ZDHXyIY1twJojT5WNx4K_Fsk3jJH6lN-rpSIA03t36WHgGLneDqo1T2vFMXsoHGa2Vf8kAjLHtz-q5nOUSLhiQ/s1600/jesus-meme.png" height="155" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">We can thus make the historically accurate and factual case that, Mr. MacArthur's 60 year old church CANNOT be the true Church of Christ due to fact that his worship service - if it so can be called - is NOTHING like the original worship services that the early Christians practiced, whereas, the Roman Catholic Mass is. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhY1tYTiwQdpoOXD81u4MTaGAPjOmKpTXdhex6-mFF9o956LrrxVqbKKcmS33t1CqOOOgxqJCfwmftbyCRykZL_-CaZbg0I1oi61U40argwwjJqcOs-5pK94Bd8qck7AtiDphAwJH_i_bA/s1600/photo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhY1tYTiwQdpoOXD81u4MTaGAPjOmKpTXdhex6-mFF9o956LrrxVqbKKcmS33t1CqOOOgxqJCfwmftbyCRykZL_-CaZbg0I1oi61U40argwwjJqcOs-5pK94Bd8qck7AtiDphAwJH_i_bA/s1600/photo.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Not pictured: "<i>Church History: according to John MacArthur</i>" </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">So, now that we know that there is absolutely no way that MacArthur's man-made church could ever be part of Christ's true Church, there is one last question that we must answer: why did he mention that the Catholic Church persecuted groups of "true believers," i.e., the Huguenots, Waldensians and the Anabaptists? Well, to begin with, Mr. MacArthur never states who these groups are and what they believe - the reason he does this is two fold: 1) by mentioning groups of "true believers" to his audience, they are quickly led to believe that they may share some common lineage in aligning themselves against the Catholic Church and, 2) by not explaining who these groups are, MacArthur is preying upon the ignorance of his congregation in order to convince them of his deluded misrepresentation of what Catholicism is. For these reasons, it is only fitting that we quickly look at who these groups are and why the Roman Catholic Church was - to use MacArthur's words - "always going after them."</span></span><br />
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">When we look at the Huguenots, Waldensians and the Anabaptists, we aren't looking at a certain group of "true Christians," what we are looking at is a group of man-made false religions and, chronologically speaking, the Waldensians first came about in the late 12th century when a man, Peter Waldo, took <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19%3A21&version=KJV"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Matthew 19:21</span></a> literally and sold off all of his holdings in order to serve Christ. As a rich land owner at the time, many people marveled at such a feat and, consequently, began to admire him. That's when Waldo started down the road of heresy. You see, after giving up all of his worldly possessions, he began to preach the Scriptures to people without any theological or pastoral background and, even more abhorrent was the fact that, he preached from a vernacular error-prone "bible" and not from the Latin Vulgate, which was the common and ordinary standard of the time.</span></span><br />
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Now, I know what some of you are thinking, some of you who read my blog are probably saying: "So what if Waldo preached without Rome's consent? He was being moved by the Holy Spirit to preach the Gospel and there is nothing wrong with that!" Well, truth be told, there was much more to Waldo's personal interpretation of Christianity then just that. Due to his personal and fallacious view of what he thought the Scriptures were saying, the Waldensians came to believe in the following: </span></span><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">They rejected private property, condemned tithes, believed in only 2 sacraments (Baptism & the Eucharist), held that an unordained layman could absolve sin but a sinful ordained priest couldn't, they rejected indulgences, fasts, ceremonies of the Church, did not believe in the differences between mortal and venial sins, claimed veneration of sacred images to be idolatry and, they condemned all oath taking to be unlawful.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">While some modern day Protestants will look at this list and say, "hey, I agree with all of those things!" The fact of the matter was that the Waldensians were preaching against founded doctrine - doctrine which had been part of established teaching for the salvation of souls by the Roman Catholic Church. If MacArthur is trumpeting the Waldensians as poor souls who suffered at the hands of the Roman Catholic Church, does he agree with the Waldensians in wholly rejecting tithes? Or, does he agree with the Waldensians on only having 2 Sacraments instead of 7? Does MacArthur reject fasting just like the Waldensians even though <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+6:16"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Jesus told us</span></a> to properly comport ourselves when we fast? You see, these are things that MacArthur doesn't agree with when it comes to the Waldensians and, when we look at the other 2 groups of "true believers" that MacArthur mentions, we see just why the Catholic Church declared them heretical.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">In the early half of the 16th century, the Anabaptists come on the scene and, their heresy of choice is denying infant baptism, declaring themselves to be the one true Church, believed in sola scriptura, as well as, Communism. Here to, the mindful Protestant will again say, "so what?" But, what the modern day Protestant fails to realize is that <u>NONE</u> of the Anabaptist's beliefs or their belief system had ever been a part of historical Christianity up until their movement was invented! Indeed, pro-Protestant historian <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thieleman_J._van_Braght"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Thielman J. Van Braght</span></a> wrote <i><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/vanbraght/mirror"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Martyr's Mirror</span></a></i> in 1660 and, in it, he attempts to layout a case against the Catholic Church by naming famous martyrs that [apparently] died at the hands of the Roman Catholic Church - specifically, Van Braght's goal is</span><span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;"> to showcase the RCC as a church that has persecuted...drum roll please...the "true" Anabaptist christians</span><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">. However,</span><span style="color: #0b5394; font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"> <a href="http://www.homecomers.org/mirror/martyrs002.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">One statement that he makes</span></a></span><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"> speaks for the heterodoxy of the Anabaptist movement:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><i>The name Anabaptists which is now applied to them, has but lately come into use, deriving its origin from the matter of holy baptism, concerning which their views differ from those of all, socalled, Christendom.</i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">The simple fact that an anti-Catholic, pro-Protestant writer states that the Anabaptist have different views than ALL of "so-called" Christianity, is proof enough as to why Christ's true Church HAD TO stomp their heretical, newly invented and man-made beliefs. Additionally, while MacArthur is lambasting the Catholic Church for "going after" the Anabaptists because of their views, he grossly omits one fact: </span><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><b><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabaptists#Persecutions_and_migrations" style="color: #0b5394; font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">PROTESTANTS PERSECUTED THE ANABAPTISTS TOO</a>!</b></span><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"> Here we note, yet again, at how the learned Mr. MacArthur simply forgets important parts of history in order to advance and perpetuate his toxic view of what real Catholicism is.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">Lastly let's look at the Huguenots. The Huguenots also came about in the 16th century as a movement of French followers of John Calvin. They believed in the Calvinistic view of predestination, denied the supremacy of the Pope, free-will, good works, purgatory, the Sacraments and, they also believed in sola-scriptura. As you can see, MacArthur more than likely mentions the Huguenots because they conform to his Calvinist view of Christianity so, by him saying that the Roman Catholic Church "went after them," he is really just defending the same brand of heretical ideas that he agrees with, to wit, he has no case here at all.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">One has to wonder though, why didn't MacArthur mention other "true christian" groups? In simply mentioning three heretical movements, one from the 12th century and two from the 16th century, MacArthur does his argument no justice. For if in fact the "true christians" have always been around, why didn't he mention any of the "true christian" groups of the second century, or the fifth, or the seventh, or the tenth? Why did he only mention these three from this particular time in history? Where is his proof that the so-called "true christians" have always set themselves against the Catholic Church prior to the Protestant Revolt? The fact of the matter is that MacArthur cannot name ANY Protestant movements that can clearly be traced to the 1st or 2nd century that have beliefs that he can agree with nor can he show, demonstrably, that the way the early Church worshiped, is the way that current day Protestants worship. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;">The Roman Catholic Church can clearly show it's pedigree from the present day to the 2nd century and into the 1st century by the virtue of St. Peter being the first leader (Pope) of our Church and, <u>ONLY</u> the Roman Catholic Church can show that, its form of worship HAS BEEN THE SAME since before the 2nd century. No other wannabe, false religious, Protestant denomination/communion or religious community, can ever say that. </span><br />
<span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 18.399999618530273px;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipHSiW8D19nrUsNVi1DZePe5CvIHtjmG9OoKXCAxIwAFv8QSxl4E6QA2MTKUOsezoS-taCy_a2QtKNC-20zzKjZ7oTeCsBGl5u-fIrsqxBVMPF_x3cZFC04Sz26Fr2BFpF9CRAMzRJB0A/s1600/catholic2000.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipHSiW8D19nrUsNVi1DZePe5CvIHtjmG9OoKXCAxIwAFv8QSxl4E6QA2MTKUOsezoS-taCy_a2QtKNC-20zzKjZ7oTeCsBGl5u-fIrsqxBVMPF_x3cZFC04Sz26Fr2BFpF9CRAMzRJB0A/s1600/catholic2000.jpg" height="143" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Damn straight.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</span><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: red;"><br /></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: red;"><br /></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: red;">*</span></span><span style="line-height: 115%;">See<span style="color: #0b5394;"> </span></span><a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/08/throwing-down-gauntlet-part-1.html"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">here</span></span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"> and </span><a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/08/thowing-down-gauntlet-part-2.html"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">here</span></span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"> for proof of Catholicism prior to 325 A.D. Click </span><a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/p/early-church-fathers-and-eucharist.html"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">here</span></span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"> for proof of the Catholic belief in the Real Presence
of the Eucharist within the writings of the Early Church Fathers that pre-date
the 4<sup>th</sup> century. Click </span><a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/p/the-early-church-fathers-and.html"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">here</span></span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"> for historical verification of the Catholic Church’s
belief in the deuterocanonical books and how the early Church not only used and
read them but, saw them as being inspired.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: red;">**</span> </span><span style="line-height: 115%;">T</span><span style="line-height: 115%;">he Greek term “τ</span><span style="line-height: 115%;">ῇ</span><span style="line-height: 115%;"> κυριακ</span><span style="line-height: 115%;">ῇ</span><span style="line-height: 115%;"> </span><span style="line-height: 115%;">ἡ</span><span style="line-height: 115%;">μέρ</span><span style="line-height: 115%;">ᾳ” or, “<i>ta kuriaka hamera</i>” that used by St. John
in </span><a href="http://www.greekbible.com/index.php"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Rev. 1:10</span></span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #0b5394;"> </span></span>is
exactly the same term that St. Ignatius of Antioch uses in his letter to the
Magnesians.</span><span style="line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span></div>
<span style="line-height: 115%;">
<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: red;">***</span></span><span style="line-height: 115%;">An interesting note
here is that MacArthur quotes </span><span style="line-height: 115%;"><a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+11%3A24-26&version=KJV"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">1 Corinthinas 11:24-26</span></span></a></span><span style="line-height: 115%;"> and, in the audio,
he states that St. Paul said, “the bread and the cup are symbols, symbols of
the new Covenant” NO WHERE in 1 Corinthinas 11 does St. Paul ever make such a
statement! Mr. MacArthur here is simply eisegeting his own personal
interpretation into that passage. Additionally, when read in context, St. Paul
is definitely talking about an actual meal that carries some significant
spiritual weight, why else would he exhort the Corinthians to abide by a proper
Eucharist in verses </span><span style="line-height: 115%;"><a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+11%3A17-22&version=NIV"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">17-22</span></span></a></span><span style="line-height: 115%;">. Lastly, if this was
merely a memorial of Christ’s death and resurrection, why does St. Paul tell us
to examine ourselves before partaking of this food? Why does St. Paul say that
there is a judgment that will befall those who eat and drink without discerning
themselves first in verses </span><span style="line-height: 115%;"><a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+11%3A27-31&version=NIV"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">27-31</span></span></a></span><span style="line-height: 115%;">? If the Eucharistic
meal is simply “symbolic” and not pertinent to the spiritual well-being of a
faithful Christian, why are there such restrictions to it?</span></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: red;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: red;"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: red;"><br /></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: red;"><br /></span></span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-23225833113934941942014-06-26T13:36:00.000-04:002014-06-26T13:36:32.943-04:00Throwing Down the Gauntlet: Episode 3, Part 1Now that we find ourselves back in Ordinary Time, I return to the business of defending Holy Mother Church. In this multi-part series, we will take a look at John MacArthur, a Protestant preacher who is not only an anti-Catholic but, a very ignorant one as well. In particular, we will be examining one of his sermons on Catholicism and I will demonstrate as just how wrong he is.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/5oLtB0WI57o?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">Of all of
the Protestant pastors that I’ve come across who bash Catholicism and the
Catholic Church’s teachings, none can hold a candle to John MacArthur. Mr.
MacArthur fancies himself a learned Anti-Catholic Calvinist who heads the 58
year old <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Community_Church_(California)"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Grace
Community Church</span></a> in California. Since there are so many misconceptions that
MacArthur spews out, this post will solely cover the following topics that
MacArthur states are reasons for why the Catholic Church is apostate as well as why all Roman Catholics are destined for hell. Specifically I will cover the typical Protestant view towards Scriptural canon,
priestly pedophilia and, priestly celibacy. As stated, this will be the first of a series,
so go grab a cola and some chips and prepare to become more learned than the
pastor of a man-made church.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">0:19-0:30 - <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">“I want to talk to you about the Pope and what is going on in the
display of Roman Catholicism in front of us, from the perspective of the Word
of God, the Scripture.”</i></span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">Right off
the bat, MacArthur wants to use the Bible to demonstrate how his personally
invented and man-made beliefs go against the 2,000 year history of the Catholic
Church. The irony here is that the Catholic Church PREXISTED the written
Scriptures and that, the Scriptures themselves, came <i>from</i> the Catholic Church! While many of the Early Church Fathers
differed on what should or shouldn’t be in Scripture, it wasn’t until the
papacy of <span style="color: #0b5394;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Damasus_I"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Pope St. Damasus I</span></a> </span>who, in 382 A.D., called a synod in Rome and
explicitly laid out what books were deemed as inspired for liturgical use and
practical for the Christian faithful. Later on at an African </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_Hippo" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">synod at Hippo in the year
393 A.D.</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">, the bishops of northern Africa came together and agreed that the
list of Scripture for the church would be the same list put forth by Damasus I
in 382. Four years after that, at the </span><a href="http://www.bible-researcher.com/carthage.html" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Council of Carthage in 397
A.D.</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">, the local bishops there stated that the canon which was pronounced by
Rome in 382 A.D. - under the supervision
of Pope St. Damsus I - was to be used by all the churches in and around
Carthage.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 16.866666793823242px;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 16.866666793823242px;">In the year 405 A.D., <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Innocent_I"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Pope Innocent I</span></a> wrote to the bishop of Toulouse to answer a question that he had about the books of Scripture that the church is using. </span><a href="http://www.bible-researcher.com/innocent.html" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 16.866666793823242px;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">In this letter</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 16.866666793823242px;">, Innocent I enumerates the same list that his predecessor Damasus I had listed a little over two decades prior. The most surprising thing about this list?<u> IT CONTAINED 73 BOOKS</u>*, the same number of books that the Catholic Church uses to this day AND NOT, the abridged collection of 66 books used by Protestants! Additionally, in that same year, St. Jerome completed the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate" style="color: #0b5394;">Latin Vulgate</a>, which is the Latin translation of the Bible and <u>THE OFFICIAL</u> Bible of the Catholic Church to this day.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
</span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2FAE7a5IG4yClOlmfECx6xS1MsylB7gh0whKua0n9NErUJMZ_6qcSf0ekpen6aUgaXwvpQgIjNs8qSnf1jx1J8qCgYmba1GerMh_u6SV-zqeO7ex6RX7qylgl8DAd4nPRFP-4i0co4og/s1600/saint-damasus.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2FAE7a5IG4yClOlmfECx6xS1MsylB7gh0whKua0n9NErUJMZ_6qcSf0ekpen6aUgaXwvpQgIjNs8qSnf1jx1J8qCgYmba1GerMh_u6SV-zqeO7ex6RX7qylgl8DAd4nPRFP-4i0co4og/s1600/saint-damasus.jpg" height="400" width="284" /></span></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">Before Craigslist and Angie's list, there was Pope St. Damsus I's <a href="http://www.crawfordcountycatholics.com/Canon_declaration.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Damasine List</span></a>!</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">The reason
why Protestants are lacking in their Scriptures is because 1 disgruntled monk,
by the name of Martin Luther, unilaterally threw out 7 books that he – a man –
deemed unworthy, uninspired and, unbecoming of his personal belief system.
Therefore, for Mr. MacArthur to say he’s going to use the Scriptures to show
how un-Christian the Catholic Church is, is in fact, a joke. Like I stated
before, the Church came BEFORE the codification, compilation and canonization
of the Bible! We need only look at Acts 5:1-11 and Acts 8:1,3 to prove this. In
</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+5%3A1-11&version=KJV" style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Acts
5:1-11</span></a><span style="line-height: 115%;">, we see that a husband and a wife, Ananias and Sapphira, lied to the
Holy Spirit via St. Peter about some money that they had promised to the
church. As a result for their lies, they both keel over dead and, what happens
thereafter is most interesting: in verse 11 we read (with <b><i>my emphasis</i></b>):</span></span><br />
<i><span style="background: white; color: black; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i>
<i><span style="background: white; color: black; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">“And
great fear came upon <b>all the church</b>,
and upon as many as heard these things.”</span></i><br />
<span style="background: white; color: black; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="background: white; color: black; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">In other words, those in the church where humbled at the
thought of lying to the leaders of the church for the Holy Spirit, God Himself,
dwelt with the head of the church, and in </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+8%3A1%2C3&version=KJV"><span style="background: white; color: #0b5394;">Acts 8:1,3</span></a><span style="background: white;"><u>,</u></span></span><span style="background: white; color: black;"> we read in part (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b>):</span></span><br />
<i style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background: white; color: black; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i>
<i style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background: white; color: black; line-height: 115%;">“And
Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great
persecution against <b>the church</b> which
was at Jerusalem…As for Saul, he made havock of <b>the church</b>, entering into every house, and haling men and women
committed them to prison.”</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">Here we see
that St. Paul, before his conversion, was persecuting the church. Why are these
2 passages so important? Well, if we know that the Book of Acts was written in
the early-to-mid 60’s A.D. and the last book of the New Testament was written
around 100 A.D., these two readings prove – beyond any doubt - that there was a
Church before there was a bible, for that reason, it is totally impossible for
any Christian to ever state that the bible is the sole foundation of a Christian church! This is something that all </span><i style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">sola scriptura</i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> Protestants must accept and, even more difficult for
them to acknowledge is the fact that the Christian Church of history, i.e.,
the Catholic Church, was well into the late 4th</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> to early 5th</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> century before it
fixed the canon of Scripture. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">This same canon of Scripture is mentioned 1,000 years later at the </span><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum17.htm" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">17th ecumenical Council of Basel-Farrara-Florence</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> which ran from 1431-1445. The 11th Session of this council took place on February 4th of 1442, in this session, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Eugene_IV"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Pope Eugene IV</span></a> declared a papal bull allowing the </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coptic_Catholic_Church#History" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Copts</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> to be in communion with Rome and, one of the main reasons for their incorporation, was that they held the same list of Scriptures (all 73 books) which was again listed and mentioned in the Council's documents. And, lastly, the same 73 books are again affirmed at the</span><span style="color: #0b5394; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> <a href="http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct04.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Council of Trent's 4th Session</span></a></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> in 1545; many Protestants like to state that the Catholic Church "added" to the Bible the 7 deuterocanonical books at Trent, additionally, some Protestants will naively state that it was at Trent that the Catholic Church first made their list of Scripture. Both of these illogical and fictional claims carry no hint of truth whatsoever due to the fact that the Council of Trent WAS SPECIFICALLY CALLED in order to address the various heresies of the Protestant "Reformation!" When we look at and study the historical documents that have come from the oldest surviving institution in Western civilization, it is clear to anyone who has some degree of intellectual honesty, that the canon of Scripture - the collection of books used in the Bible - was established by the Roman Catholic Church circa 400 A.D. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">And it was
only the Catholic Church being guided by the Holy Spirit through the Magisterium
and Sacred Tradition that was able to stay afloat for close to 400 years WITHOUT
the Bible. Gee, I wonder how long the average Protestant denomination would
last today without their abridged Bible? </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicYbTYwyz7VCUbNBmORYW-IAhVq5LBqF1935VUNOBlzbyByjEXkVKXwA6d86E3tMU0p_0CZ-HBH91Yvym1meV_-Ti7pKKbiNjBLq9qFqXJFqvpOJ5Tk9CVttoXqhSm11p-4pH3Xp82s9w/s1600/which-of-these-food-items-it-not-delicious2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicYbTYwyz7VCUbNBmORYW-IAhVq5LBqF1935VUNOBlzbyByjEXkVKXwA6d86E3tMU0p_0CZ-HBH91Yvym1meV_-Ti7pKKbiNjBLq9qFqXJFqvpOJ5Tk9CVttoXqhSm11p-4pH3Xp82s9w/s1600/which-of-these-food-items-it-not-delicious2.jpg" height="270" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Who Wants To Baffle A Protestant?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br /></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">1:49-4:06 – <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">“And there is no group of people in the Roman Catholic system more
tragic and more desperate than priests…because it has been imposed upon them
that they should live their lives in unnatural restraint. They should live
their lives in a forced celibacy, which leads to horrible sexual perversion and
deviation… the massive homosexuality…the pedophilia…the blackmail…while this
happens in the world, it happens more under the horrors of this forced kind of
celibacy that came in the 1100’s when, the Bishop of Rome, wanted to stop the
accumulating wealth of priestly families. So, he came up with the celibacy of
the priesthood, confiscated all their properties, all their possessions…he
broke the back of those wealthy families, it certainly had no biblical
purpose.”</i></span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">Quite a lot
to digest here so, let’s go through these hackneyed accusations and see just
how wrong Mr. MacArthur is on each count. First, let’s deal with the myth that
priestly celibacy leads to homosexuality and pedophilia…a favorite of the
anti-Catholic Protestant.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">Saying that
the discipline of celibacy in the Roman Catholic priesthood yields men that
commit pedophilia is not only asinine but, ignorant. The fact of the matter is
that RCC priests and men in the general population <u>HAVE THE SAME PERCENTAGE</u>
of pedophilia, which averages anywhere from </span><a href="http://www.journalismcenter.org/resource/child-welfare/more-characteristics-sexual-offenders-pedophiles-non-pedophiles-juveniles" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">3%</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">
to </span><a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/06/what-science-reveals-about-pedophilia.html" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">5%</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">.
The 1996 book, </span><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Pedophiles-Priests-Anatomy-Contemporary-Crisis/dp/0195145976" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><i><span style="color: #0b5394;">Pedophiles and Priests: Anatomy of a
Contemporary Crisis</span></i></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><i><span style="color: #0b5394;">,</span></i> was written by Non-Catholic author and scholar, Phillip
Jenkins and, it is largely held as one of the best factual books on the
subject. In his book, Jenkins went through 40 years of documented abuse cases
within the Roman Catholic clergy in the Archdiocese of Chicago, one of the
largest in the country. He found that from 1951 to 1991, 2,252 priest served
the Archdiocese and of these, 59 sexual abuse allegations had been made or,
better stated: for a 40 year period, only 2.6% of all priests that worked in a
Chicago parish MAY HAVE had inappropriate sexual contact with a minor.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">I emphasis
the “MAY HAVE” because of those 59 cases, we don’t know how many </span><a href="http://www.themediareport.com/tag/falsely-accused-priests/" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">may be false</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">
</span>and how many may have been truthful. So, it can be at least stated that between
1951 to 1991, in one of the largest Archdiocese in the country, less than 2.6%
of all Roman Catholic priests could be labeled as bona fide pedophiles. This
small percentage is also seen in the Boston Archdiocese scandal that first brought
this issue to the forefront in the late 1990’s. At its hysterical height, </span><a href="http://www.bishop-accountability.org/resources/resource-files/media/boston-pf.htm" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">up
to 80 RCC priests</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> in the Archdiocese of Boston had been accused of sexual
misconduct but, after all of the investigative work and prosecutions, only 4
priests, </span><a href="http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/geoghan" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">John Geoghan</span></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">, </span><a href="http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/birmingham/" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Rev. Joseph Birmingham</span></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">, <span style="background: white; color: black;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/shanley/" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Rev. Paul R. Shanley</span></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> and, <span style="background: white; color: black;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/paquin" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Rev. Ronald H. Paquin</span></span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> were found guilty of
molesting young children. These men had all been priests for 30 years, the
calculus therefore yields that, 4 out of 80 equates to 5% of the accused
priests being actual sexual molestors.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">In 2002 the
USCCB (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) enlisted the Jon Jay
College of Criminal Justice to conduct an independent study on sexual abuse and
sexual allegations within the Catholic Church. </span><a href="http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/child-and-youth-protection/upload/The-Nature-and-Scope-of-Sexual-Abuse-of-Minors-by-Catholic-Priests-and-Deacons-in-the-United-States-1950-2002.pdf" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">The
study</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> looked at all available information of 14 different Archdiocese from
1950 to 2002 and it found that 10,667 people made sexual abuse allegations
against 4,392 Catholic priests and deacons during that 52 year time span.
According to the study, that’s approximately 4% of <u>ALL</u> the priests and
deacons during the 52 time span that the report looked at!</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">Just this
year, in March of 2014, the USCCB </span><a href="http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/child-and-youth-protection/upload/2013-Annual-Report.pdf" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">released
the findings of an independent audit</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;"> </span>that was conducted in order to address
how to keep children safe from sexual molestation. Its findings were
remarkable:</span><br />
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></b>
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">-</span></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> Of the 38,700 active priests** in all of 2013, only 10
contemporaneous abuse allegations made against priests were deemed “credible.”
That’s .03% of ALL priest in 2013</span><br />
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></b>
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">-</span></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> 2013 saw the “fewest allegations and victims” since
annual reports were first started in 2004.</span><br />
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></b>
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">-</span></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> Of the 40 claims made against the RCC during the
report’s auditing period (2011-2013), only 7 claims were substantiated in that
2 year period nationwide. That’s 7 claims for the 38,700 ordained priests** in
2013, or, .02% of all priest.</span><br />
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></b>
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">-</span></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> Of the 370 allegations leveled against priest in
2013, only 1% of those involved child pornography.</span><br />
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></b>
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">-</span></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> 40% of all priests who were accused in 2013 were
already deceased</span><br />
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></b>
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">- </span></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">78% of all priests who were accused in 2013 were
either already deceased, removed from ministry, laicized or, missing</span><br />
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></b>
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">-</span></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> 90% of all abuse accusations from 2013 allege
incidents from at least 25 years ago</span><br />
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></b>
<b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">-</span></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> 80% of all 2013 investigated cases were either unable
to be proven or unsubstantiated, where as 14.6% were substantiated.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">As we can
see, Mr. MacArthur’s notion that pedophilia is wide spread within the cloisters
of the Catholic Church don’t hold much water when dutifully scrutinized.
MacArthur is simply buying into his personal hatred for the Catholic Church and
coupling it with the one-sided reporting of the media. But, what MacArthur is
failing to realize is that pedophilia is also an issue WITHIN PROTESTANT
CHURCHES!</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">While
MacArthur is pointing to the Roman Catholic Church, he conveniently forgets (or refuses to acknowledge) what Boz Tchividjian,
a Protestant law professor at Liberty University </span><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/01/protestant-sex-abuse-boz-tchividijian_n_4019347.html" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">recently
said</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> while comparing Evangelicals to Catholics on responding to sexual
abuse claims:</span><br />
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i>
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">“I think we are worse…Protestants can
be very arrogant when pointing to Catholics…”</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">And just who
is Boz Tchividjian? He’s none other than the grandson of famed evangelical
Billy Graham. That’s right, the grandson of one of the greatest evangelical
Protestants that ever lived, has come out and explicitly stated that there is
in fact a sexual abuse problem within Protestantism. This is verified by the
fact that there are, on average, </span><a href="http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2007/06/18/80877.htm" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">over
260 documented sexual abuse allegations yearly that come from Protestant churches</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">.
This number comes from Church Mutual Insurance Co., GuideOne Insurance Co. and
Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Co., which are the top 3 companies that insure the
majority of Protestant churches in America. Additionally, since there is no
centralized authority that requires all Protestant churches to report
allegations of sexual abuse, it is clear that - among the Protestants - sexual
molestation goes vastly unreported; and there is no better example of this under reporting
than that of the Southern Baptists.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">The Southern
Baptist Convention (SBC) is the second biggest Christian group in the U.S. right
behind Roman Catholics, which makes them the largest Protestant body in the
U.S., you would think that such a large body of Christians would deem it
appropriate to catalogue and record sexual abuse allegations and cases within
their denomination in order to bring any wrong-doing to light, right? Well,
guess what? The SBC has done exactly the opposite!</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">In 2008, the
SBC </span><a href="http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1855948_1861760_1862212,00.html" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">rejected
establishing a database</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> of clergy and staff who may have been convicted or
indicted of molesting minors. You read that right, the SBC opted NOT TO index
or record any instances of pedophilia within its ranks and, just one year later
in 2009, Baylor University </span><a href="http://www.baylor.edu/clergysexualmisconduct/" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">released a study</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> that
definitively concluded that sexual abuse in Christian and Jewish churches was
more common than previously held and, more importantly, it occurred across ALL
religious denominations.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">So MacArthur
really has no room here in which to correlate celibacy with pedophilia, to the
typical Protestant the idea of priestly celibacy is a peculiar one at best but,
it does not equate to pedophilia, for if it did, why would the general
population of men – who aren’t celibate – commit pedophilia at the same, if not
higher, rate then Catholic priests? Likewise with the charge of homosexuality,
if in fact celibacy makes priests homosexuals, why is it that the general heterosexual population
of men who commit pedophilia is similar to priests? To say that celibacy is
associated with pedophilia and homosexuality is to say that men, who are not
priests, and who perpetrate sexual abuse of minors, must also be celibate –
which is an idiotic statement not rooted in reality.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">Whew, that
was a lot! I hope that I was able to elucidate some of the truths about what
has occurred in the RCC with regards to the sexual abuse scandals and children,
I’m certainly not making any apologies for any Catholic priests or staff that
have molested children but, what I am trying to demonstrate is that “the sword
swings both ways;” in the same manner that some Catholic clergy have committed
grave sexual sins with minors, so too have some Protestant religious members. Now
that we’ve dealt with that, let’s look at Mr. MacArthur’s comment about
celibacy being a medieval era concoction that stripped money from priestly
families.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">To begin
with, celibacy does not mean “can’t get married,” celibacy means that one abstains from sex, regardless of whether one is married or not, additionally,
priestly celibacy was not invented in the 1100’s but, 700 years before that!
Celibacy became universally practiced in the 4<sup>th</sup> century when a
local synod of 19 bishops and 24 priests convened in Spain in 305 A.D. At the </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc2.v.vi.xv.html" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Synod of Elvira</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">,
the early church Fathers produced over 80 different canons on discipline, conduct and, order for the Christian community. </span><a href="http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/Canon%20Law/ElviraCanons.htm#c.33 celicacy" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Canon
33</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> is the most pertinent to my point, it states:</span><br />
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i>
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">Bishops, presbyters, deacons, and
others with a position in the ministry are to abstain completely from sexual
intercourse with their wives and from the procreation of children. If anyone
disobeys, he shall be removed from the clerical office.</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">So, here we
see that any ordained man, if he be married, must be celibate – refrain from
sexual intercourse - in order to have a legitimate office within the Catholic
Church. A decade later at the </span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3803.htm" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Council of Neocaesarea in 315
A.D.</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">, the first Canon of that meeting decreed the following regarding priestly
marriage:</span><br />
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i>
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">If a presbyter marry, let him be
removed from his order; but if he commit fornication or adultery, let him be
altogether cast out [i.e. of communion] and put to penance.</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">I don’t know
about you Mr. MacArthur, but that sounds succinctly like priestly celibacy and,
10 years later at the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D., the 318 Church Fathers
declared the following in </span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3801.htm" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Canon
3</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> of that council:</span><br />
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i>
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">The great Synod has stringently
forbidden any bishop, presbyter, deacon, or any one of the clergy whatever, to
have a subintroducta dwelling with him, except only a mother, or sister, or
aunt, or such persons only as are beyond all suspicion.</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">In other
words, the men of the Church were not to have any women, save family, living
with them in order not to cause scandal. Here we see, </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 18.399999618530273px;">much to the chagrin of Mr. MacArthur, </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"> that, by the first quarter
of the 4th century, celibacy was already introduced into the Church! But don’t think for a moment
that priestly celibacy ends there are, if we continue through the 4th and 5th century we see the following (</span><b style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><i>my emphasis</i></b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">):</span><br />
<i><span style="background: rgb(254, 255, 255); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i>
<i><span style="background: rgb(254, 255, 255); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">For it became Him
who is pure, and a teacher of purity to have come forth from a pure
bride-chamber. For if <b>he who well
fulfils the office of a priest</b> <b>of
Jesus abstains from a wife</b>, how should Jesus Himself be born of man and
woman?</span></i></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">- </span><span style="color: #0b5394; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207.ii.xvi.html" style="line-height: 115%;">St.
Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures Book 2, Chapter 12, paragraph 25,
circa 350 A.D.</a></span></span><br />
<i><span style="background: rgb(254, 255, 255); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i>
<i><span style="background: rgb(254, 255, 255); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">The Lord Jesus
formally stipulated in the Gospel that he had not come to abolish the law, but
to bring it to perfection; this is also why he wanted the beauty of the Church
whose Bridegroom he is to shine with the splendor of chastity so that when he
returns, on the Day of Judgment, <b>he
will find her without stain or wrinkle, as his Apostle taught. It is through
the indissoluble law of these decisions that all of us, priests and deacons,
are bound together from the day of our ordination, and [held to] put our hearts
and our bodies to the service of sobriety and purity;</b>may we be pleasing to
our God in all things, in the sacrifice we offer daily</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span lang="ES-NI" style="line-height: 115%;">- </span><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span lang="ES-NI" style="color: #0b5394;"><a href="http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/Canon%20Law/Decretals/SiriciusDecretal.htm#Concerning Marriage">Pope Siricius, Directa Decretal, 385
A.D.</a></span></span></span><br />
<i><span style="background: rgb(254, 255, 255); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i>
<i><span style="background: rgb(254, 255, 255); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">In accordance to
with this rule Peter and the other Apostles (I must give Jovinianus something
now and then out of my abundance) had indeed wives, but those which they had
taken before they knew the Gospel. <b>But
once they were received into the Apostolate, they forsook the offices of
marriage.</b></span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">- </span><span style="color: #0b5394; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf206.vi.vi.I.html" style="line-height: 115%;">St. Jerome,
Against Jovinianus, Book I, paragraph 26, 393 A.D.</a></span></span><br />
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i>
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">If then “he who is married cares for
the things of the world” (1 Cor. 7:33), and a Bishop ought not to care for the
things of the world, why does he say the husband of one wife? Some indeed think
that he says this with reference to one who remains free from a wife. <b>But if otherwise, he that hath a wife may
be as though he had none (1 Cor. 7:29). For that liberty was then properly
granted</b>, as suited to the nature of the circumstances then existing. And it
is very possible, if a man will, so to regulate his conduct. For as riches make
it difficult to enter into the kingdom of Heaven, yet reich men have often
entered in, so it is with marriage.</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;">-<span style="color: #0b5394;"> </span></span><span style="color: #0b5394;"><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf113.v.iii.xi.html" style="line-height: 115%;">St. John
Chrystosom, Homily 10 on 1 Timothy 3:1-4, 397 A.D</a><span style="line-height: 115%;">.</span></span></span><br />
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i>
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 115%;">Aurelius the bishop said: When at the
past council the matter on continency and chastity was considered, those three
grades, which by a sort of bond <b>are
joined to chastity by their consecration, to wit bishops, presbyters, and
deacons…should be continent altogether</b>, by which they would be able with
singleness of heart to ask what they sought from the Lord; so that what the
apostles taught and antiquity kept, that we might also keep.</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">-</span></i><span style="line-height: 115%;"> <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3816.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Canon
3 of the Council of Carthage 419 A.D.</span></a></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYjZGDjVhnL6YfONuM3lZIn7ZDXSuFGB4lP9a9CU-ZpGFM0Qth0SsHk_YsrtB4AWrmbJYg-dE9c59MIKJzAzdN4q7qh2x5DD1pUNJEQHk86V6DR1dLs0lFp_0jdjZI8EeVL1mSpi2wiTg/s1600/the-rev-john-macarthur.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYjZGDjVhnL6YfONuM3lZIn7ZDXSuFGB4lP9a9CU-ZpGFM0Qth0SsHk_YsrtB4AWrmbJYg-dE9c59MIKJzAzdN4q7qh2x5DD1pUNJEQHk86V6DR1dLs0lFp_0jdjZI8EeVL1mSpi2wiTg/s1600/the-rev-john-macarthur.png" height="176" width="320" /></span></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">Celibacy was invented in the 1100's! Trust me, my 60 year old church knows more than the 2,000 year old Catholic Church that my Lord established! </span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 115%;">So, as we can see, Mr. MacArthur has told a bold-face lie in stating that celibacy started in the 12th century when clearly there is historical and documented proof for the discipline of celibacy from the early 4th century but, why would MacArthur lie to his congregation about this? Simply stated, the only reason as to why MacArthur would spit-out such falsehoods is because he is attempting to do what most anti-Catholic Protestants do: they like to demonstrate that important aspects of Catholicism were invented at a later time and therefore have no semblance of the "real" Christian Church of history. Unfortunately, MacArthur is wrong and that old Protestant trick won't work here; honestly, could anyone really look at MacArthur and state that his preaching is inspired if he is teaching error? How could anyone even remotely listen to MacArthur and fully believe him if he's willing to lie about something as trivial, to the common Protestant, as celibacy within the Catholic priesthood? How could anyone trust him to tell the truth? Either John F. MacArthur is a </span><span style="line-height: 115%;">categorical liar or he's selectively choosing that information which would better help out his personal belief system...even if said information is a half truth or no truth at all.</span></span><br />
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial;"><br /></span></span>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFPWKRAda_P53JtyRwb0nTwvMhE8nl4tuOb2YndiiOWBTwJVRmN29FyzOhKEVmG-oiluEJotsx_X-DtnBXcoJDAiseZTsabU5w6bfjaSh4Qq4wSZD1hPRcIL-otDwMYgIqAvpufGXisyc/s1600/48593718.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFPWKRAda_P53JtyRwb0nTwvMhE8nl4tuOb2YndiiOWBTwJVRmN29FyzOhKEVmG-oiluEJotsx_X-DtnBXcoJDAiseZTsabU5w6bfjaSh4Qq4wSZD1hPRcIL-otDwMYgIqAvpufGXisyc/s1600/48593718.jpg" height="264" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Where, Protestantism > Historical proof</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Lastly, let's look at the real reason as to why the Catholic Church decided for a celibate priesthood.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If one were to simply hear the dishonesty that MacArthur is expelling, it would seem as if the Catholic Church forced celibacy upon dutiful priests because they were getting to powerful and rich and, of course, the Roman Catholic Church didn't want that. So, they forced all priests to stop being married so that their children wouldn't live a good life and, forced the priest to be celibates in order to better control them. If that is all that we knew, our level of ignorance would match that of MacArthur.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As I have already demonstrated, the celibate priesthood was already being formed in the Catholic Church by the early 300's A.D. By the time we get to the 11th century, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_VIII"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Pope Benedict VIII</span></a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_II_of_Germany"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Emperor St. Harry II</span></a>, have convened a synod at Pavia in the year 1022. In this synod, <a href="http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moa/aga4909.0001.001/190?page=root;size=100;view=image"><span style="color: #0b5394;">it was decreed</span></a> that all ordained deacons, subdeacons, priests and, bishops be celibates and marriage was now officially forbidden within the priesthood. But, why did the Church take this extreme step? To sum it up in one word: <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14001a.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">simony</span></a>.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">You see up until that time priest were allowed to be married and, just like any married man, these pries had sons. And, just like the the Levitical priesthood of the Old Testament, these sons of priestly fathers became priests and often times, these priestly sons married the daughters of other priestly families and these families would not only become bigger but, wealthier. And, with wealth, crept in sin. By the 11th century, many priest would offer their services for a fee, some would use their money to buy political power and influence, others would use it to buy ecclesiatical offices or favors and, some of those within the hereditary priesthood, would buy up church land for their own use. In other words, some priests saw themselves as kings who had free reign over their sheep and, with enough money, they had the ability to abuse their standing as they saw fit.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This was the reason as to why Pope Benedict VIII declared an all celibate priesthood, it wasn't that he invented it, as MacArthur would have us believe but, in order to stem the corruption that was starting to flourish, Pope Benedict VIII looked at Church history and saw that the notion of celibacy - which had already been around for over 700 years - was the most novel approach. And, considering that the medieval Church was full of so many scoundrels, imagine how many more Catholic priests, bishops or Popes would've had untold wealth and power during the medieval-renaissance era! The Catholic church would've been awashed in priestly families vying for control a la the mafiosi crime syndicates. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Therefore the Church, being guided by the Holy Spirit, decided that the only way to maintain the integrity of God's priestly caste was to eliminate marriage from the practice. We see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Leo_IX"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Pope St. Leo IX</span></a> also championing the case for a celibate priesthood during the Easter synod of 1049 in which <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=6kAOAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA433&lpg=PA433&dq=Easter+synod+of+1049&source=bl&ots=cg9e17oXnw&sig=fw5ocjKVmFNiyHV8wgmHSqaK4LE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=6h2sU53-EIikyAT4hYLwBw&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Easter%20synod%20of%201049&f=false"><span style="color: #0b5394;">he renewed and reaffirmed the discipline of celibacy</span></a> for ordained men all the way from subdeacon to bishop in order to fight against the corrupt clerical politicos of the time who treated their offices as something that could be sold to the highest bidder. Close to 30 years later, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Gregory_VII"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Pope Gregory VII</span></a> held the first <span style="color: #0b5394;"><a href="http://www.cristoraul.com/ENGLISH/History-of-the-Popes/GalleryofHistory/Gregory_VII/CHAPTER_IV_FIRST-STRUGGLES.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Lenten Synod in 1074</span></a> </span>in which he renewed the decrees against simony and the importance of incontinence (celibacy) within the clergy. At the <span style="color: #0b5394;"><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum10.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Second Lateran Council</span></a>,</span> which met in 1139, the Church Fathers decreed the following in Canon 6 (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b> added):</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We also decree that those in the orders of subdeacon and above who have taken wives or concubines are to be deprived of their position and ecclesiastical benefice. For since <b>they ought to be in fact and in name temples of God, vessels of the Lord and sanctuaries of the holy Spirit, it is unbecoming that they give themselves up to marriage and impurity.</b></span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The fact was that the Church organically introduced celibacy for her priests because married ordained men were more interested in taking care of their wives/mistresses as well as taking great pains to secure an inheritance for their children at the expense of the Christian faithful. This is why we have a celibate priesthood; for a priest to not marry and devote himself to the needs of his community and not to those of family life, is indeed, a selfless act that beckons a call to a higher state of morality. As St. Paul states in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+7%3A32-33&version=KJV" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">1 Corinthians 3:32-33</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">"...He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife."</span></i><br />
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></i>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is the biblical evidence for having celibacy within religious orders. St. Paul himself declared in 1 Corinthians 3 what the Catholic Church would eventually have to pronounced: married priest tend to care more about worldly and temporal things whereas unmarried priests - by not having the extra avarice - focus more on the Lord and the needs of the Church. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here too we see that MacArthur has lied yet again when he stated that celibacy </span><i style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">"had no biblical purpose."</i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> If St. Paul, who </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+7%3A7-8&version=KJV" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="color: #0b5394;">was a celibate man himself</span></a><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> and wrote half of the New Testament, stated that remaining unmarried carried a special, grace filled dignity for servicing the Lord, how can Mr. MacArthur - a </span><i style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">sola scriptura</i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> adherent - proclaim that there is no scriptural purpose or basis for a celibate priesthood? </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
</div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The only reason as to why MacArthur would state such a blatant lie is primarily due to the fact that his man-made theology is lacking; so, to give his personal interpretation of the Gospel of Christ more substance and meaning, Mr. MacArthur <u>has to</u> twist history and scripture in order to arrive at his preconceived theological terminus. </span><br />
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
</div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
</div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
</div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
</div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
</div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><span style="color: red;">*</span></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">When counted, we see that the Damasine List contains 44 O.T. books and 27 N.T. books, the additional 2 books of the O.T. are the latter chapters of the Book of Daniel. <a href="http://www.usccb.org/bible/daniel/13"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Daniel 13 = Susanna</span></a> and, <a href="http://www.usccb.org/bible/daniel/14"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Daniel 14 = Bel and the Dragon</span></a>. We know that these 2 books were part of original canon because it came from the Septuagint (LXX) which contained these 2 extra chapters of Daniel. Hence 44 O.T. books + 2 extra books from Daniel + 27 N.T. books = 73.</span></span><br />
<div style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><b><span style="color: red;">**</span></b><span style="font-size: x-small;">In order to
substantiate the 38,700 ordained priests, we can look at the fact that, as of
2014, there are </span><a href="http://cara.georgetown.edu/caraservices/requestedchurchstats.html"><span style="color: #0b5394; font-size: x-small;">38,275
active priests</span></a><span style="font-size: x-small;"> with </span><a href="http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/vocations/ordination-class/upload/Ordination-Class-of-2013-report-FINAL.pdf"><span style="color: #0b5394; font-size: x-small;">497
having been ordained in April of 2013</span></a><span style="font-size: x-small;">. Considering the fact that the USCCB
audit ended in June 2013, the real number of ordained men is actually closer to
38,700.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></span></div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-22013481498754834892014-06-15T01:03:00.001-04:002014-06-16T11:32:28.934-04:00The Holy Trinity: A Case Against Same-Sex "Marriage" (Part 2)<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And now to the $65,000 question, how does the Trinity negate the notion of same-sex “marriage?”
Well, let’s briefly recap what we know about the Doctrine of the Trinity:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b>1.</b> God the Father DID NOT make God the Son. Jesus, was with
God the Father from the beginning and, according to the Council of Nicea, He is
of the same substance (homoousios) as the Father, that is, he is consubstantial
with the Father.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b>2</b>. The Council of Constantinople unerringly declared that
God is a Trinity, a “tri-unity” of the Three Persons that constitute the one God. It
also decreed that the Holy Spirt <i>“proceeds from the Father and the Son”</i> when it
ultimately fixed the Nicea-Constantinople Creed.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Now, let’s understand one VERY important attribute of God,
and that is that, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+4:8"><span style="color: #0b5394;">God is love</span></a>. This is 100% unquestionable and, if we are going to relate God and marriage, then surely, God as the ideal model for love must be taken into account. And, if it is true that God is love, then
we must also realize that the Three Persons of the Trinity form perfect love.
But, how exactly does this happen?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Simply put, God the Father loves His Son and, since He is perfect, He HAS TO love perfectly. God the Son cannot
deny the love that God the Father gives Him so, as the Son, Jesus, who is also God, perfectly reciprocates
the love of the Father by pouring Himself – all that He is – back to the Father. This love, this mutual exchange of Divine love, is <u>so perfect </u>and <u>so real</u>
that, that very same love, <u>becomes another real and perfect person,</u> which becomes the Holy
Spirit. Hence the reason as to why the Fathers at Constantinople in 381 stated
that the Holy Spirit “proceeds from” the first 2 persons of the Godhead. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So, therefore, what we have here is the epitome of what love is: the mutual self-giving of oneself for the love of another which leads to the manifestation of another separate being.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The important thing here to note is that the Doctrine of the Trinity, was established BEFORE Sacred Scripture was canonized and put forth by the Council of Rome in 382 A.D., it was at that synod of bishops, which was headed by Pope St. Damasus I, that the very first set of inspired Scriptures is not only stated but, historically rooted for the early Church. Pope St. Damasus I states that the Church acknowledges <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2972164/posts"><span style="color: #0b5394;">73 books as being inspired</span></a>, which is the same number of book in the bible that ALL Roman Catholics use to this day. Hence, before the Scriptures were codified into the worship of the early Christians, the fact that God was 3-in-1 was already settled, thus, everything we read in the Scriptures that yields evidence for the Trinity was simply stating an established belief of what the church already knew and not vice versa. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Jesus told us in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:48"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Matthew 5:48</span></a>, to "be perfect, as your Father in Heaven is perfect." In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+5%3A1&version=NKJV"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Ephesians 5:1</span></a> and <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+11%3A1&version=NKJV"><span style="color: #0b5394;">1 Corinthians 11:1</span></a>, St. Paul tells us to imitate Christ and, </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Peter+2%3A21&version=NKJV"><span style="color: #0b5394;">1 Peter</span></a></span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Peter+2%3A21&version=NKJV"><span style="color: #0b5394;"> 2:21</span></a>, St. Peter exhorts us to do the same. Why do I mention this? Well Christ told us to be like the Father and, the Apostles tells to imitate Christ, basically, we are to be God-like in our behavior and in our actions. Therefore, if we know that God is love and that we are to imitate God, how does God want us to love?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This question leads us to the crux of my argument. If God intended solely for a married man and woman to be in the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, it only makes logical sense that such a union WOULD HAVE TO IMITATE GOD'S LOVE. That is, a man and a woman would have to - in the giving of one to another - produce something that is a real manifestation of their love, in the same way that the Father and the Son's love produces the Holy Spirit.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">With heterosexual matrimony, it is quite clear that this is entirely possible: a man loves his wife, the wife loves her husband, the two love each other so much that they physically procreate another real human due to the bond of love that they have. In the same manner that God the Father and God the Son bring forth God the Holy Spirit, a heterosexual couple - through the marital act - beget a child. The love of a husband and a wife is so real that it equates to another real human being. </span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">THIS IS WHY THE TRINITY IS THE TRUMP CARD AGAINST SAME-SEX "MARRIAGE." Only through the marital union that God has originally made, can man and woman mirror and simulate God's love as He intended us to do. This is also one of the reasons as to why the Church teaches against sex outside of marriage; if in fact we are called to be imitators of God and, if in fact, all life is Holy, then the act which brings about new life - the act which God ordained for a married couple - must too be treated with the utmost respect. To trivialize human sexuality and not uphold it's proper place within humanity is an atrocity. God gave us the marital union so that we could be like Him, so that a man and a woman can be one (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+10%3A8%2C+Matthew+19%3A5&version=NKJV"><span style="color: #0b5394;">see Mark 10:8 and Matthew 19:5</span></a>), and, it is in this oneness, that the mystery of who God is and how God loves becomes revealed to us.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghWCyWfzNSpWmNEETnzi9s_HwhLqFjDzyhV04eOo-VV4dkqwgSAnS4lPPWJ5Okrxnef4AEDT7IaEuRF9ZZEBzVg_DDXAeWsacoFvLZdp7xIZKm_cNTu0OFc7zWN_UwnXGC8KFXaQUxBaI/s1600/adam_and_eve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghWCyWfzNSpWmNEETnzi9s_HwhLqFjDzyhV04eOo-VV4dkqwgSAnS4lPPWJ5Okrxnef4AEDT7IaEuRF9ZZEBzVg_DDXAeWsacoFvLZdp7xIZKm_cNTu0OFc7zWN_UwnXGC8KFXaQUxBaI/s1600/adam_and_eve.jpg" height="240" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Right from the beginning, man and woman had a special bond with God and the serpent saw to it that it be undermined. If man and woman share a special bond that allows them to parallel who God is, <a href="http://www.churchofsatan.com/faq-sexuality.php"><span style="color: #0b5394;">wouldn't Satan also want to destroy that bond as well</span></a>?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">When we analyze homosexual "marriages," we find this extremely basic imitation of God is absolutely absent. Two gay men cannot love one another to the extent that their love naturally gives birth to another and two lesbians can never love each other to the point where they can generate another human being that shares in both of their natures. No homosexual act can ever bring about nor produce another real human being and, therefore, no homosexual union can ever mimic God's perfect love. And, while no human can ever attain perfect love on a humanly level, it is categorically obvious that we can, on a humanly level, partake in the Divine Nature through heterosexual union and not through homosexual coupling. Indeed, homosexual "marriages" not only mock God's divine marital ordinance but, it makes the Holy and Blessed Trinity an inoperative, impractical, illogical and, unworkable model for who God is. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For this fundamental reason, it is impossible for any Catholic and any true Christians to ever concede that homosexual "marriages" or unions can be harmonized with true Christianity for they make a caricature of what Holy Matrimony is and, has <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19%3A8&version=NKJV" style="color: #0b5394;">always been</a>: an indissoluble covenant between a man and a woman which reveals to us who God is and how God loves. And, anyone who chooses to debate this point need not take it up with the teachings of the Church but, with God Himself.</span></div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-61729751175251309982014-06-13T16:08:00.002-04:002014-06-13T16:10:25.618-04:00The Holy Trinity: A Case Against Same-Sex "Marriage" (Part 1)<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b>Considering that this Sunday we will be celebrate Trinity Sunday on the liturgical calendar, I thought it fitting to not only go over what the Trinity is but, to apply it to one of today's hotly debated topic, same-sex "marriage." I will be putting out two posts, the first one deals with the apologetical view of the Trinity having come from the Roman Catholic Church and, the second, will demonstrate just how the Trinity negates the notion of homosexual marriages. </b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Of all of the Christian concepts, the Holy and Blessed
Trinity is somewhat of a conundrum due to the fact that most Christians believe
that our God is Triune but, that same majority, cannot clearly define what the
Trinity is and how we as Christians know it to be a truth. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is definitely a sad thing to behold because the
greatest case for the Church’s teaching against same-sex marriage can be
succinctly seen if we understand what and who the Trinity is. But, before I can
unpack this truth, let’s first get a clearer understanding of who God – as the
Trinity – is. This post will be divided into 2 parts, the first one will demonstrate
and affirm the Trinity as a revealed truth given to the Catholic Church and,
the second post will deal exclusively with the Trinity and homosexual unions. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">INTRODUCTION<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">One of my favorite anti-sola scriptura proofs is that of the
Trinity due to the fact that so many Protestants hold true to the fact that God
is Three-In-One but, NEVER ONCE do the Scriptures ever state this and, NEVER
ONCE does the bible ever use the term “Trinity” to describe who or what God is.
Indeed, the bible-alone Protestant cannot rely on the bible-alone in order to
prove that God is a Trinity. While they can use several verses to prop-up the
evidence, a fundamentalist and literal reading of the bible will never yield
the dogma of the Trinity nor the name Trinity itself. This is very important
because any Protestant denomination that holds that God is triune is not holding
an explicit biblical belief but a belief based on historical Christianity, that
is, they are holding an explicit Catholic belief. This brings us to our first
analysis:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">WITHOUT THE CATHOLIC
CHURCH THERE WOULD BE NO TRINITY!</span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is without a doubt a very troubling supposition to make
to a Protestant Christian; to tell them that the only reason they know about
the Trinity is primarily due to the Roman Catholic Church, is a sure fire way
to get them in a tizzy. But, the fact of the matter is that the Trinity itself,
that is, the fact that God is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, was a proclamation
made, unerringly by the Catholic Church at the Council of Constantinople in 381
A.D.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This was the second ecumenical council that the Catholic
Church undertook, with Nicaea being the first one. At Nicaea, the early church
fathers did away with the Arian heresy, a heresy that denied the divinity of
Christ and, by definitively declaring that Jesus as the Son of God is
consubstantial with God the Father, they decreed that Christ was Divine.
However, towards the end of the 4<sup>th</sup> century, another group of
heretics started to challenge who God was.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This new group of heretics were called the Macedonians or,
as they were known in Greek, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumatomachi"><i><span style="color: #0b5394;">Pneumatomachi</span></i></a> – which translates to “combaters against the
spirit.” They held that both God the Father and God the Son were deific but,
they did not view God the Holy Spirit as divine. Along with several other
heretical movements that were discussed at the Council of Constantinople (<a href="http://www.tertullian.org/fathers2/NPNF2-14/Npnf2-14-61.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Anomeans,
Eudoxians, Saballians, Marcellians, Photinians and, the Apollinarians</span></a>), the
150 Church Fathers of that council stated in the <span style="color: #0b5394;"><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum02.htm#The exposition of the 150 fathers"><span style="color: #0b5394;">First
Canon </span></a> </span>that the Nicene’s council’s
declarations have not been repealed, that is, <a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum01.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">the faith that the 318
father’s professed</span></a> at Nicaea in 325 A.D. when they stated it in the Creed was
not null but, the Creed itself would now incorporate the following: </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">“And in the Spirit, the holy, the lordly and life-giving
one, proceeding forth from the Father, co-worshipped and co-glorified with
Father and Son, the one who spoke through the prophets; in one, holy, catholic
and apostolic church. We confess one baptism for the forgiving of sins. We look
forward to a resurrection of the dead and life in the age to come. Amen.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is why the official term for the creed that we profess
every Sunday as Catholics isn’t the Nicene Creed but, properly stated, it is
the Nicene-Constantinople Creed – due to the fact that it originated in Nicaea
and concluded in Constantinople some 50 years later because of the heretical
movements of the 4<sup>th</sup> century. And, it was in the <a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum02.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Fifth Canon of the
Council of Constantinople</span></a> that the Trinity is explicitly expressed:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">“…we have also recognised those in Antioch who confess a
single Godhead of Father and Son and holy Spirit.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What the 150 Church Fathers stated here was that they
believed that God was 3-in-1 as it was recognized by those in Antioch, that is
to say that, the philosophy behind the Trinity originated with the Church
Fathers at Antioch. One need only look to the Patriarchs of Antioch to find the
early remnants of the Trinitarian belief: St. Ignatius was the third Patriarch
of Antioch and, in his <span style="color: #0b5394;"><i><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0105.htm">Epistle to the Magnesians</a></i>
</span>written in the early 100’s A.D., he states the following in regards to God being
Three Persons:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><em><span style="background: white;">“…Jesus Christ, who was with the Father before
the beginning of time, and in the end was revealed </span></em><em><span style="background: white; font-style: normal;">(</span></em><em><span style="background: white;"><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0105.htm"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Chapter
6</span></span></a>)…Jesus Christ, who came forth from one Father, and is with and has
gone to one </span></em><em><span style="background: white; font-style: normal;">(<a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0105.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Chapter 7</span></a>)</span></em><em><span style="background: white;">…so all things whatsoever you do, may prosper
both in the flesh and spirit; in faith and love; in the Son, and in the Father,
and in the Spirit…Be subject to the bishop, and to another, as Jesus Christ to
the Father, according to the flesh, and the apostles to Christ, and to the
Father, and to the Spirt…</span></em><em><span style="background: white; font-style: normal;">(<span style="color: #0b5394;"><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0105.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Chapter 13</span></a>)</span></span></em><em><span style="background: white;">…”</span></em><i><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In Chapter 6 of his epistle, we see St. Ignatius state that
Christ was with God the Father from the beginning of time, hence, Jesus wasn’t
created and, if not created, He had to have been begotten from the Father from
all eternity. In Chapter 7, he states that Jesus is “with” God the Father, if
He is with God the Father, then Jesus must be part of Him. Hence, the fact that
– for the Trinity to properly understood – Jesus is <i><a href="http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/270595/homoousios"><span style="color: #0b5394;">homoousios</span></a></i>
with the Father, that is, Jesus shares of the same substance as God the Father
(homo = same, ousia = substance). Lastly, in Chapter 13, St. Ignatius of
Antioch makes it unquestionably clear that the Son, the Father, and the Spirit
are all interconnected.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Eighty years or so after St. Ignatius, we come to the seventh
Patriarch of Antioch, Theophilus. In the second book of his <i><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02042.htm"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Apology to Autolycus</span></a></i>,
written in 181 A.D., we see in Chapter 15 that Theophilus is contemplating the
Creation Narrative and, in analyzing the 4<sup>th</sup> day of Creation, he
formulates the Trinity:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">“<span style="background: white;">In like manner also the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span>three days which were before the luminaries,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>are types<span class="apple-converted-space"> of
the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span>Trinity,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>of<span class="apple-converted-space"> God</span>,
and His<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Word,
and His Wisdom.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In exegeting the
Creation Narrative, Theophilus becomes the first person ever to use the word “Trinity”
to describe the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Therefore, we can see why the Fathers
at the Council of Constantinople in 382 A.D. stated that they recognized what those
in Antioch had already professed, namely, that God is one under 3
different auspices. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The question here
is, where these Antiochians Catholic? Well, we know that in the Book of Acts, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+11:26&version=KJV"><span style="color: #0b5394;">11:26</span></a>,
it states that it is in Antioch that the first followers of Christ were called “Christians.”
We also know that the book of Acts date to the mid 60’s A.D and, we also know that
St. Ignatius was the bishop of Antioch <a href="http://sor.cua.edu/Patriarchate/PatriarchsChronList.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">from 68 A.D. to
his death in 107 A.D.</span></a>, what this means
is that Ignatius was the leader of this new group of people who were calling
themselves “Christians.” Now, this is where the ecclesiastical rubber hits the
road: On his way to be martyred, St. Ignatius writes a series of letters to
different churches and, it is in the <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.vii.viii.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">8<sup>th</sup> Chapter</span></a>
of his <i>Epistle to the Smyrnaeans</i>,
that he states something rather remarkable:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<em><span style="background: white;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">"See that you follow the bishop, even as
Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and
reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything
connected to the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper
Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom
he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude
[of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the
Catholic Church."<o:p></o:p></span></span></em></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<em><span style="background: white; font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In
other words, the leader of the group of Christians in Antioch, was THE FIRST
person to state that the true Church of Jesus Christ was called the Catholic
Church! And, even more astonishing is that he stated this before his death in
107 A.D.! The point that I’m trying to make is this: the very first instance of
a Trinitarian formula came from St. Ignatius, a bishop who was the shepherd of one of the
very first Christian communities and, that very same bishop, referred to the
church that he and his flock belonged to as the Catholic Church. And then, 2
generations later, the 7<sup>th</sup> bishop of Antioch – who belonged to the Catholic Church – is THE FIRST person to state the word “Trinity” when
describing who God is. Therefore, when the Council of Constantinople stated in
Canon 5 that they will be observing the Godhead as it is “recognized by those
in Antioch,” the Catholic Church was simply validating the revelation
that it had received through the bishopric of Catholic Church at Antioch! <o:p></o:p></span></span></em></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><em><span style="background: white; font-style: normal;">We could
also include <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenagoras_of_Athens"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Athenagoras of Athens</span></a>, as yet
another Catholic priest who was one of the very first men to mention God as a
Trinity. In his 177 A.D. work</span></em><em><span style="background: white;">, A Plea for the Christian</span></em><em><span style="background: white; font-style: normal;">, Athenagoras states in the <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.v.ii.x.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">10<sup>th</sup> chapter</span></a>
the following regarding the worship of the Christian God:<o:p></o:p></span></em></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<em><span style="background: white;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">“Who, then, would not be astonished to hear men
who speak of God the Father, and of God the Son, and of the Holy Spirt, and who
declare both their power in union and their distinction in order…?”</span></span></em></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We can make a proper assumption that Athenagoras also
believed in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist due to the fact that,
in <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.v.ii.xxxv.html"><span style="color: #0b5394;">Chapter 35</span></a>,
he renounced the charge of cannibalism that has been brought against the Christians*;
why would such an allegation be made against Christians by the pagan Romans if
they didn’t think that there was some truth to it? Truth be told, the early
Christians weren’t cannibals, they simply did what the early Church did in her
liturgy, that being, they celebrated the Eucharist as the real Body and Blood
of Christ…the same way that the Roman Catholic Church still does to this day!</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The huge takeaway here is that it was the Roman Catholic
Church who was at these first ecumenical councils that resolutely helped defined
the Trinity - with help from the Holy Spirit of course. <u>THIS IS A FACT THAT
NO PROTESTANT CAN DENY</u>. The fact of the matter is that no Protestant church
can ever make a substantial or demonstrable case that demonstrates that their
denomination/communion was at these councils. Indeed, it would take over 1,100
more years after the Council of Constantinople before the Protestant Revolt
would seize Europe and fracture the unity of the Mystical Body of Christ.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Therefore it is noteworthy to state that, because of the authority that the Catholic Church has, she was able to definitively define a dogma of the Christian faith (the Trinty) as well as elucidate as to the nature of the relationship between God the Father and God the Son (homoousios). This is <u>very important</u> because EVERY sola-scriptura Protestant denomination that may believe in the Holy Trinity must attribute this divine revelation, not to the Scriptures - because they weren't canonized yet - but, to the work of the Holy Spirit guiding the one true Church.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">*<span style="font-size: x-small;">Note how Athenagoras strongfully rails against abortion as
well! </span></span></div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-8341235046549659222014-05-13T15:20:00.001-04:002014-05-13T15:20:29.326-04:00Easter is Pagan. NOT! (Part 3)<div class="MsoNormal">
An Easter Season message from an Anti-Catholic Protestant:<br />
<br />
<b><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">“The Roman Catholic Church is the pagan Whore of Babylon! She is the idolatrous harlot who speaks blasphemies and persecutes the 'real' Christians!”<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I’m pretty sure that a lot of us have heard this phrase in
our lifetime, it is usually exclaimed by an anti-Catholic Protestant who has
been force fed a diet of lies and twisting of Sacred Scripture. How can someone
make such a claim you may ask? Well, let’s go through some Scripture verses and
flesh out these Protestant claim. I will break up each argument into 3 sections: </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">1) Claim = What the Protestant believes.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">2) Conclusion = “Proof” for the Protestant claim.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">3) Rebuttal = Demonstrating how the claim and the conclusion
are wrongfully arrived at.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">As usual, unless otherwise noted, all Scripture references
come from the KJV.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>CLAIM #1: Rome is
Babylon.</b> How can this statement be justified? To the mind of a Roman
Catholic, this is impossible: Rome is where the Vatican is and where St. Peter
and St. Paul got martyred, whereas Babylon is where the Jews were exiled to for
70 years before being restored to the Promised Land. How can an anti-Catholic
make this claim? Well, in the first Epistle of Peter, written by St. Peter
around 65 A.D. while he was in Rome and held the bishopric there, he closes out
by sending some final greetings from Rome; he states the following in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Peter+5%3A13&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">1Peter
5:13</span></a>:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">The church that is at Babylon, elected
together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son.</span><o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>CONCLUSION:</b> St.
Peter was martyred in Rome around 67 A.D. and all Catholics state that he was
the first Bishop of Rome, i.e., the Pope. Therefore, when Peter wrote his 1<sup>st</sup>
Epistle, he was writing from Rome and, towards the end of his letter, explicitly
sends regards from “the church at Babylon.” Hence, Rome is Babylon.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>REBUTTAL: </b>Why did
St. Peter refer to Rome as Babylon? Because, from a historical perspective,
Babylon was the home of the pagans that persecuted the Jews for over 70 years during
their Babylonian captivity from 535 B.C. to 610 B.C.; it was during this time
the First Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed. Fast-forward 680 years later to 70
A.D. and, by this time, the pagan Romans are in charge of the Holy Land and
they have destroyed the Second Temple in Jerusalem. Additionally, in the same manner
that Babylon persecuted the Jews, now it is the Romans who are persecuting the
new People of God, namely, the Christians. Therefore, when St. Peter refers to
Rome as Babylon, he is referring to the pagan Roman’s oppression of the Church.
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">What we need to remember is when Rome is referred to as Babylon,
it is <u>EXPLICITLY </u>referring to the ancient pagan Roman Empire AND NOT
modern day Rome nor is it referring to the Vatican or Roman Catholicism; to
take St. Peter’s word’s out of their historical context in order to prove a
false and deceptive presumption is not only disingenuous but, at the very
least, immoral.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>CLAIM #2: ROME IS THE
“GREAT CITY” SET ON 7 HILLS UPON WHICH THE WHORE IS SEATED. </b>All
anti-Catholics who subscribe to this ill-formed schema, cite Revelation 17 as
their source for justifying the idiotic notion that the RCC = The Whore of
Babylon. In Revelation 17, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+17%3A1-8&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">the
first 8 verses</span></a> depict a harlot who rides atop a scarlett beast with 7 heads
and 10 horns but, in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+17%3A9&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">verse
9</span></a>, we read the following: </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">And here is the mind which hath wisdom.
The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth…<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">So, what we have
here is the fact that the woman/whore sits atop seven hills. This has to be the
Roman Catholic Church because the Vatican is one of the 7 primary hills of
Rome! <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZgCVRhZv_oemeUatagU4wnB2mIgvPOgqcXVtaIQg6zhKR7XtYjE1jTy3Fsebd49JZ8gHs23ICL5o6-W9lksehcaqmG7zQu9MvNNpdCRNc8WMgfXS_O8qonKB6ge5Rc0m5HWh23R7_wko/s1600/RomeHills.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZgCVRhZv_oemeUatagU4wnB2mIgvPOgqcXVtaIQg6zhKR7XtYjE1jTy3Fsebd49JZ8gHs23ICL5o6-W9lksehcaqmG7zQu9MvNNpdCRNc8WMgfXS_O8qonKB6ge5Rc0m5HWh23R7_wko/s1600/RomeHills.JPG" height="281" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Note the 7 hills of Rome and how close the<br />
Vatican is to those hills! Coincidence?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Additionally, we
see that the woman/whore sits next to the water, in Revelation 17:1 we read in
part:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">…saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew
unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgJFCugh5vfyNujpMo5sLFzsKEe8LeBWqvaMuD6fM9pgyjFQaCFO9nXv3hzQUDNud8seFsi3-cTbSJzA2pM-hZjXONJYicIYwoheSxpeE6_9d3FJf7jrco-GL_32ZoiuOUU4FJY2HbmEGg/s1600/Vatian-Tiber.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgJFCugh5vfyNujpMo5sLFzsKEe8LeBWqvaMuD6fM9pgyjFQaCFO9nXv3hzQUDNud8seFsi3-cTbSJzA2pM-hZjXONJYicIYwoheSxpeE6_9d3FJf7jrco-GL_32ZoiuOUU4FJY2HbmEGg/s1600/Vatian-Tiber.JPG" height="213" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Less than 2,000 feet away we find water!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">It should also be
noted that Rev. 17:1 is referring directly to the Roman Catholic Church because
no other Christian religion has been able to penetrate all of the parts of the
world like the Roman Catholic Church, thereby sitting upon many waters! Lastly,
we read in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+17%3A18&version=KJV"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Revelation 17:18</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> that the woman/whore is a “great city,” this is also
a direct reference to Rome because the only great city at the time the Book of
Revelation was being written was the city of Rome itself:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">And the woman which thou sawest is that
great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth</span></i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">CONCLUSION:</span></b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> Therefore, we have here clear evidence
that Rome is the Whore because: 1) She sits atop 7 hills, 2) she sits upon the
waters as well as many parts of the world and, 3) she is the “great city” to
which St. John refers to in his Apocalypse. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">REBUTTAL: </span></b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Above all other “reasons” for the Catholic
Church to be the Whore of Babylon, these are usually cited the most because
they can easily be used to draw an observers attention away from the truth and
towards a more misconstrued view of what is factual. First, let’s deal with the
“7 hills” argument.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Saying that the
Vatican, which is in Rome and sit’s 130 feet above sea level, is the woman
spoken of in Revelation 17 - because it is situated among 7 hills - is simply an
attempt at trying to take a verse of Scripture and twisting it to be something
it is not. If the “7 hills” argument is to be taken seriously then why not
state that the 7 hills are the </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hills_in_Edinburgh#Debate_over_.27The_Seven.27"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">7 hills of Edinburgh, Scotland</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">? Or, why not the </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_hills_of_Istanbul"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">7 hills of Istanbul, Turkey</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">? Or, how about Kampala, Uganda, since it too was </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kampala#Features"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">founded on 7 hills</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">? We can add </span><a href="http://www.lynchburghistoricalfoundation.org/history/"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Lynchburg, Virginia</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> to that list, as well as: </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_hills_of_Seattle#The_seven_hills"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Seattle, Washington</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">; </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_hills_of_Moscow"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Moscow, Russia</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">; </span><a href="http://www.travelnotes.org/City-Guides/prague/"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Prague, Czech Republic</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">; </span><a href="http://www.sunnylisbon.com/city-of-the-seven-hills/"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Lisbon, Portugal</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">; </span><a href="http://www.musement.com/en/brussels"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Brussels, Belgium</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">; and, </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_hills_of_Ia%C5%9Fi"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Isai, Romania</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">. Or, how about the fact that our
country’s Capital has seven hills, those being, Capitol Hill, Meridian Hill,
Floral Hills, Forest Hills, Hillbrook, Hillcrest and, Knox Hill? <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Even more
disturbing, the fact that the birthplace of Islam’s prophet and it’s most holy
city of </span><a href="http://www.therefinersfire.org/mecca.htm"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Mecca in Saudi Arabia WAS BUILT AROUND 7 HILLS</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">! Gee, you’d think that an anti-Catholic
Protestant would be more inclined to take St. John’s vision of a blasphemous
and diabolical city situated among 7 hills and equate it with Mecca but, no.
Instead it is much easier for the anti-Catholic to look at Rome with more
disdain then a religion that, quite frankly, only spread via the sword. Kinda
goes to show you the lengths that some will go to in order to deny Rome of her
primacy.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">So, the “7 hills
argument” can be easily refuted by noting that there are MANY major cities
around the world that could be the so-called “great city” situated on seven
hills – if all we had was Revelation 17 then a strong contention could be made
for Rome being the “great city” as well as the whore. But, there are 4 reasons
as to why Rome cannot be the pagan, idolatrous and abominable Whore of Babylon
but, instead, as I will show, it is referring to Jerusalem, that is, Jerusalem IS the Whore of Babylon.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Reason #1, St. John tells us explicitly
that it is NOT Rome but Jerusalem.<o:p></o:p></span></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">That’s right, St.
John EXPLICITLY states that the “great city” is Jerusalem. The “great city” is
first mentioned in Revelation 11 when St. John is ordered to measure out the
Temple, </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+11%3A1-3%2C7-8&version=KJV"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Revelation 11:1-3,7-8</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> reads (<b>my emphasis</b>):<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="chapter-2" style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text"><i>And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel
stood, saying, Rise, and <b>measure the
temple of God,</b> and the altar, and them that worship therein. </i></span></span><i style="font-family: inherit;">But the
court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is
given unto the Gentiles: and <b>the holy
city</b> shall they tread under foot forty and two months. </i><i><span style="font-family: inherit;">And I will
give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two
hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth…</span></i></div>
<div class="chapter-2" style="background: white;">
<i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text"><i>…And when
they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the
bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill
them. </i></span></span><span class="text" style="font-family: inherit;"><b><i>And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city</i></b></span><span class="text" style="font-family: inherit;"><i>, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, <b>where also our Lord was crucified</b>.</i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text" style="font-family: inherit;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">St. John tells us
here that the “great city” is allegorically referred to as Sodom and Egypt AND it is also where
Jesus was crucified. Jesus was not crucified in Rome but, in Jerusalem! And, to
a first century Jew, referring to Jerusalem as Sodom and Egypt denoted that the
great city of Jerusalem had become a mere shadow of its former self and had
slipped into sinful habits. St. John is showing us in these passages that, in
the first century A.D., Jerusalem had become so wicked and so evil that this is
why the Lord met his death there; so bad was Jerusalem at that time that they
not only missed the promised Messiah but, they imitated the deplorable acts of
Sodom and Egypt!<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Reason #2, Jerusalem is called a Harlot/Whore/Prostitute
various times in the Old Testament.<o:p></o:p></span></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">How is the faithful city become an harlot!
it was full of judgment; righteousness lodged in it; but now murderers.</span> </i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">(<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+1%3A21&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Isaiah
1:21</span></a>)<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">And I saw, when for all the causes whereby
backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill
of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played
the harlot also.</span></i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah+3%3A8&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Jeremiah
3:8</span></a>)<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="chapter-2" style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text"><i>Again the word of the</i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i> </i></span><span class="small-caps"><i><span style="font-variant: small-caps;">Lord</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i> </i></span><span class="text"><i>came unto me, saying, Son of man, cause Jerusalem to know
her abominations,</i></span><i> <span class="text">And say,
Thus saith the Lord</span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="small-caps"><span style="font-variant: small-caps;">God</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="text">unto Jerusalem…And
when I passed by thee, and saw thee polluted in thine own blood, I said unto
thee when thou wast in thy blood, Live; yea, I said unto thee when thou wast in
thy blood, Live…Now when I passed by thee, and looked upon thee, behold, thy
time was the time of love…yea, I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant
with thee…And thy renown went forth among the heathen for thy beauty: for it
was perfect through my comeliness, which I had put upon thee, saith the Lord</span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="small-caps"><span style="font-variant: small-caps;">God</span></span><span class="text">. But thou
didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot because of thy renown,
and pouredst out thy fornications on every one that passed by; his it was…Thou
hast built thy high place at every head of the way, and hast made thy beauty to
be abhorred, and hast opened thy feet to every one that passed by, and
multiplied thy whoredoms.</span> <span class="text">Thou hast also
committed fornication with the Egyptians thy neighbours, great of flesh…Thou
hast played the whore also with the Assyrians, because thou wast unsatiable;
yea, thou hast played the harlot with them, and yet couldest not be satisfied.</span>
<span class="text">Thou hast moreover multiplied thy fornication in the land of
Canaan unto Chaldea; and yet thou wast not satisfied therewith.</span> <span class="text">How weak is thine heart, saith the</span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="small-caps"><span style="font-variant: small-caps;">Lord God</span></span><span class="text">, seeing
thou doest all these things, the work of an imperious whorish woman;</span> In
that thou buildest thine eminent place in the head of every way, and makest
thine high place in every street; and hast not been as an harlot, in that thou
scornest hire; But as a wife that committeth adultery, which taketh
strangers instead of her husband! </i><span class="text">(<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+16%3A1-32&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Ezekiel
16:1-32</span></a>)</span><i><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="chapter-2" style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">The beginning of the word of the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span class="small-caps"><span style="font-variant: small-caps;">Lord</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"> by
Hosea. And the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span class="small-caps"><span style="font-variant: small-caps;">Lord</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"> said
to Hosea, Go, take unto thee a wife of whoredoms and children of whoredoms: for
the land hath committed great whoredom, departing from the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span><span class="small-caps"><span style="font-variant: small-caps;">Lord</span></span>.</i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hosea+1%3A2&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Hosea
1:2</span></a>)<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text"><i>Whoredom and
wine and new wine take away the heart.</i></span><i> <span class="text">My people ask counsel at their stocks, and their
staff declareth unto them: for the spirit of whoredoms hath caused them to err,
and they have gone a whoring from under their God.</span> <span class="text">They sacrifice upon the tops of the mountains, and burn incense upon
the hills, under oaks and poplars and elms, because the shadow thereof is good:
therefore your daughters shall commit whoredom, and your spouses shall commit
adultery.</span></i><span class="text"> (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hosea+4%3A11-13&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Hosea
4:11-13</span></a>)</span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Reason #3, The Beast in Revelation 17
destroys the whore.<o:p></o:p></span></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Yet another
reason that the woman/whore cannot be Rome is because the Beast she rides upon
eventually devours her! In other words, pagan Rome = Beast and the Whore =
Jerusalem. This is exactly in line with what happened in 70 A.D. when the Roman
Empire sacked the great city and demolished the Jewish Temple. We see this
stated in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+17%3A16&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Revelation
17:16</span></a>:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">And the ten horns which thou sawest upon
the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked,
and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire.</span><o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Thus, the Beast
and the Whore are two different things but, if the Whore is Jerusalem, how do
we know that the Beast is the pagan Roman Empire? If we read through <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+13%3A18&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Revelation
13:18</span></a>, we get a clue that the Beast has a mark with a numerical value of
666. Then, if we then look at <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+17%3A9-10&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Revelation
17:9-10</span></a>, we see that the Beast is compromised of 7 heads which represent 7
kings: 5 of the kings have fallen, there is a current king upon a throne and,
the final king has not yet come but, when the final one arrives he will be king
for a short time.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">What does all of
this mean? Well, if in fact the Beast is to be understood as the pagan Romans,
then – historically speaking – it makes perfect sense when we look at the 7
Caesars that ruled the Roman Empire during the great persecution of the
Christians:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">1. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar"><span style="color: #45818e;">Julius Caesar, 49-44 B.C.</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">2. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustus"><span style="color: #45818e;">Augustus, 31 B.C. – 14 A.D.</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">3. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius"><span style="color: #45818e;">Tiberius, 14-37 A.D.</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">4. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caligula"><span style="color: #45818e;">Caligula, 37-41 A.D.</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">5. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudius"><span style="color: #45818e;">Claudius, 41-54 A.D.</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">6. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nero"><span style="color: #45818e;">Nero, 54-68 A.D.</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">7. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galba"><span style="color: #45818e;">Galba, 68-69 A.D.</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Here we see that
St. John is relating the 7 heads of the Beast (pagan Rome) to it’s 7 kings
(Caesars). Note at how the last king only reigned for a short time as stated in
Rev. 17:10 and once we analyze Nero’s title in Greek and transliterate it into
Hebrew, we arrive at the number 666:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Nero Caesar
(English) = </span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/null"><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Ηρων</span></i></a><span style="background: white;"> </span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/null"><span style="background: white; color: windowtext;">Κσρ</span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> (“Nron Qsr” in Greek) = </span><span style="background: white; color: #252525;">נרונ קסר</span> (Hebrew)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #252525;">ר</span> – Resh
= 200<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #252525;">ס – Samekh = 60<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #252525;">ק – Qoph = 100<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #252525;">נ – Nun = 50<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #252525;">ו – Vav = 6<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #252525;">ר – Resh = 200<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; color: #252525;">נ – Nun = 50<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Total for Nero
Caesar = 666. Hence, St. John speaks of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire#Under_Nero"><span style="color: #45818e;">first
huge wave of Christian persecution that started under Nero</span></a> and not in
anyway shape or form to the Pope, Roman Catholicism or the Vatican.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1fSKtBCV7rTKnlzzHZOFQfp6RyN5-twf754J02i1Yhyphenhyphencb7wQ22LXxTDEFCkCexWfymR5QytxU1ITvA7uwUK5mtqXG19XcOswLsAuLLUBAfsyv_Mqspcs5QVTkyf1jd-nPthVDNocioG0/s1600/8-kings-chart-new-francis.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1fSKtBCV7rTKnlzzHZOFQfp6RyN5-twf754J02i1Yhyphenhyphencb7wQ22LXxTDEFCkCexWfymR5QytxU1ITvA7uwUK5mtqXG19XcOswLsAuLLUBAfsyv_Mqspcs5QVTkyf1jd-nPthVDNocioG0/s1600/8-kings-chart-new-francis.png" height="281" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The twisting of Scripture in order to derive a non-historical and<br />
non-Catholic meaning, is the epitome of Anti-Catholic Protestantism.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Reason #4, The “great city” is replaced by
the “New Jerusalem,” or, the Bride.<o:p></o:p></span></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+18%3A5-8&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Revelation
18:5-8</span></a>, we read that God will indeed cast his judgment upon Jerusalem:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text"><i>…or her sins
have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.</i></span><i> <span class="text">Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double
unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill
to her double…so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, “I
sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.</span>” <span class="text">Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning,
and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord
God who judgeth her.</span><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span class="text"><br /></span></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">After God is done judging the Whore and the Beast, we read about
the New Jerusalem prepared by God for His People in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+21%3A9-22&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Revelation
21:9-22</span></a> (<b>my emphasis</b>):<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">…<span class="text"><i>And there came unto me one
of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues,
and talked with me, saying, Come hither, <b>I
will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife.</b></i></span><i> <span class="text">And he carried me away in the spirit to a great
and high mountain, <b>and shewed me that
great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,</b></span><b> <span class="text">Having the glory of God:</span></b><span class="text"> and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a
jasper stone, clear as crystal;</span> <span class="text">And had a wall
great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names
written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of
Israel…</span><span style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">And I saw no temple therein: for
the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.</span><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><br /></span></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><br /></span></i></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">For all of these
reasons, the Roman Catholic Church CANNOT be the Whore of Babylon. When we
analyze what Scripture is trying to tell us and when we interpret Scripture
within its historical context, we see that the only way one can come to such an
erroneous and delusory conclusion is either through pure ignorance or
deliberate blindness. </span><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-76851840463249017992014-05-02T09:29:00.003-04:002014-05-02T09:29:23.657-04:00Easter is pagan. NOT! (Part 2)<div class="MsoNormal">
HAPPY EASTER!!!<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Continuing on with my Easter Season posts, this one will
deal with another cited reason as to why Easter has pagan origins, namely, that
it was Constantine who approved of Easter.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The explanation goes something like this: <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">In 325 A.D. – Emperor Constantine, a pagan
Sun-god worshiper, at the Council Nicaea ordered all Churches to celebrate the
Resurrection of Christ on Easter Sunday, which was the high pagan holy day of Sol
Invictus. The ancient Church had celebrated the Resurrection during the Passover
[Nisan 14], which could fall on any day of the week, but the Churches near Rome
had abandoned the practice because they hated the Jews, and fixed the date to
the first Sunday after the first full moon of Spring. They also called the
celebration ‘Easter’, after the pagan goddess of Spring.<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is only one way in which this presumption can be shown
to be false, that being, we must prove that the Catholic Church was celebrating
a Paschal Feast, i.e., “Easter” PRIOR TO the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, with that being said, let’s look at the historical
accounts as to the existence of an Easter celebration before the First Council
at Nicaea!<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Early Church historian and bishop of Caesarea, Eusebius
Pamphilus (260-340 A.D.), attended the First Nicene Council but, more importantly,
he finished his work entitled, <i>Church
History</i>, before 325 A.D. We are sure of this due to the fact that, in the
final book of <i>Church History</i>,
Eusebius dedicates it to Paulinius, the bishop of Tyre (See <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.xvi.i.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Book X, paragraph
2</span></a>). Paulinius became the bishop of Antioch and died after only 6 months as
Antioch’s patriarch. His successor and the 25<sup>th</sup> Patriarch of
Antioch, Eustathius, just so happened to be present at Nicaea in 325 A.D. Along
with Eusibiu, he is said to have been among the 318 bishops at the Council. Therefore,
we know as a matter of fact that, when Eusebius finished his opus on the History
of the early Catholic Church, <u>HE HAD TO</u> have written all 10 books <u>BEFORE</u>
Constantine [apparently] forced the Catholic Church to co-opt the pagan
worshipping day of Sunday for their Masses as well as the celebration of the
resurrection day of their Messiah to coincide with pagan practice.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Eusebius is proof that the early Church – which was entirely
Catholic in its identity – was ALREADY celebrating a Paschal Feast that
memorialized the resurrection of Christ. He wrote in <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.x.xxiv.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Book V, Chapter
23</span></a> entitled, <i>The Question then
agitated concerning the Passover</i>, the following: <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>“A question of no
small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older
tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon [Nisan 14], on which day
the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast
of the Savior’s Passover. It was therefore necessary to end their fast on that
day, whatever day of the week it should happen to be. But it was not the custom
of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this time, as they
observed the practice which, from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to the
present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the
resurrection of our Savior.<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>Synods and assemblies
of bishops were held on this account, and all, with one consent, through mutual
correspondence drew up an ecclesiastical decree, that the mystery of the
resurrection of the Lord should be celebrated on no other but the Lord’s day,
and that we should observe the close of the paschal fast on this day only.
There is still extant a writing of those who were then assembled in Palestine,
over whom Theophilus, bishop of Cæsarea, and Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem,
presided. And there is also another writing extant of those who were assembled
at Rome to consider the same question, which bears the name of Bishop Victor;
also of the bishops in Pontus over whom Palmas, as the oldest, presided; and of
the parishes in Gaul of which Irenæus was bishop, and of those in Osrhoëne and
the cities there; and a personal letter of Bacchylus, bishop of the church at
Corinth, and of a great many others, who uttered the same opinion and judgment,
and cast the same vote. <o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>And that which has
been given above was their unanimous decision.”<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, what does Eusebius tell us here? He literally tells us 3
things: <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>1) A Paschal Feast
has been observed due to Apostolic Tradition.</b> Eusebius states that Easter
isn’t a man-made tradition nor is it a man-made observance, on the contrary, as
Catholics we correctly uphold the legitimacy of unerring Apostolic Tradition
(See<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a2.htm"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">CCC
Sec.1 Chap.2 Article 2</span></a></span>). Hence, to
celebrate Easter, is to celebrate a God-inspired day in which all faithful
Christians are to reflect on the majesty and joyfulness of Christ having freed
us from the shackles of death.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>2) There is a form of
fasting involved, that is, they fasted up until the Paschal festival. </b>Easily
seen here is the historical evidence for fasting up until Easter or, as Roman
Catholics call it, Lent. Here is proof that the Early Christians fasted for a
certain number of days or weeks up until Easter and, as we shall shortly see,
it wasn’t whether or not Christians had to observe the Paschal Festival but,
the real issue among the Church Fathers was on which day(s) that the faithful
should observe Easter!<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>3) The early Catholic
Churches came together to acknowledge that the Paschal Feast should be observed
on a Sunday. </b> The day Jesus rose from
the dead was to be the day set on the calendar for the Paschal Feast. This fact
alone refutes the “Constantine ordered Easter to be on a Sunday” argument, for
here we see that Eusebius – writing <b><u>BEFORE</u></b>
the Council of Nicaea – states that some of the major churches came together
and agreed to commemorate the resurrection of the Lord on “the Lord’s day,”
i.e., Sunday.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If we continue into <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.x.xxv.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Book V, Chapter
24</span></a> of <i>Church History</i>, we see that
even though the churches agreed to celebrate the resurrection of the Lord, the
one thing they had some difficulty with was the date. In the 24<sup>th</sup>
Chapter, Eusebius recalls how the Bishop of Rome, Victor (d. 199 A.D.), chose
to excommunicate the churches in Asia who did not want to conform to the ruling
of the prevailing churches. The Asian churches, led by Polycrates (130-196
A.D.), who was the bishop of Ephesus at the time, sent a letter to Victor on
behalf of the churches in Asia stating that they observe “the exact day” of
Nisan 14. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nisan 14 (think April 14), it should be noted, is the day
before the Jewish Passover. To this day, practicing Jews celebrate the 7 days
of their Passover beginning on Nisan 15. We see that the Passover is made into
a perpetual holiday by God in Exodus 12 and, in the Gospel of John, we see <a href="file:///C:/Users/Martinez/Dropbox/Now%20it%20was%20the%20day%20of%20Preparation%20of%20the%20Passover.%20It%20was%20about%20the%20sixth%20hour.%5ba%5d%20He%20said%20to%20the%20Jews,%20"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">several
verses</span></a> that could lead one to believe that Nisan 14 is the proper day of the
Paschal Feast regardless of what day it falls on. The Asian bishops held that
the celebration should begin at the time when the disciples ate the Passover
with Christ in the upper room, which is roughly in line with the Jewish
Passover itself.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Not only did Polycrates cite St. John the Evangelist as a
source for their belief but he goes down the list of some of the most well
known Church Fathers of the 2<sup>nd</sup> century! Victor becomes incensed
when he hears of this and, another very well known Early Church Father helps to
mediate the situation between the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Ephesus...Enter
St. Irenaeus.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Eusebius quotes a letter from St. Irenaeus (130-202 A.D.) which
was written to squelch the disagreement between the two factions. In this
letter to Victor, St. Irenaeus recounts an account by Polycarp (70-155 A.D.),
who was the Bishop at Smyrna and an apostle of St. John, of an instance when
Polycarp visited Rome and talked with St. Anicetus (d.168 A.D.), the Bishop of
Rome at the time:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>“For the controversy
is not only concerning the day, but also concerning the very manner of the
fast. For some think that they should fast one day, others two, yet others
more; some, moreover, count their day as consisting of forty hours day and
night.<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>And this variety in
its observance has not originated in our time; but long before in that of our
ancestors. It is likely that they did not hold to strict accuracy, and thus
formed a custom for their posterity according to their own simplicity and
peculiar mode. Yet all of these lived none the less in peace, and we also live
in peace with one another; and the disagreement in regard to the fast confirms
the agreement in the faith…</i> <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
…<i>And when the blessed
Polycarp was at Rome in the time of Anicetus, and they disagreed a little about
certain other things, they immediately made peace with one another, not caring
to quarrel over this matter. For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp not
to observe what he had always observed with John the disciple of our Lord, and
the other apostles with whom he had associated; neither could Polycarp persuade
Anicetus to observe it as he said that he ought to follow the customs of the
presbyters that had preceded him.<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>But though matters
were in this shape, they communed together, and Anicetus conceded the
administration of the eucharist in the church to Polycarp, manifestly as a mark
of respect .And they parted from each other in peace, both those who observed,
and those who did not, maintaining the peace of the whole church.”<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
St. Irenaeus bears witness here that, by the early 2<sup>nd</sup>
century, the church as a whole was celebrating the resurrection of Jesus; the
only difference was that the Eastern churches celebrated Easter on Nisan 14 and
the Western Church celebrated it on the Sunday AFTER Passover. Did this rift
lead them to split the Early Church in two? Nope. The one Body of Christ
remained unsplintered and would continue to stay united for another 1,300
years, until a sole disgruntled monk decided he knew better than the Church and
invented his own personal religion; an action that would spark the Protestant
revolt.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbXA_ERXBN7hVbZ0wZZisKwFySHaz0G1-s_vWJ58HM94kMtL_Vy1AwyY6VUZ2V6UZ53g2JArHfQTvte7ckd0yaijdovbP9AiIBTWm8oauZsr8rnVYIkN-aSQYpEBfq-hp0LrbNTeUkOu8/s1600/Eusebius_of_Caesarea.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbXA_ERXBN7hVbZ0wZZisKwFySHaz0G1-s_vWJ58HM94kMtL_Vy1AwyY6VUZ2V6UZ53g2JArHfQTvte7ckd0yaijdovbP9AiIBTWm8oauZsr8rnVYIkN-aSQYpEBfq-hp0LrbNTeUkOu8/s1600/Eusebius_of_Caesarea.jpg" height="320" width="261" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Eusebius of Ceasaera: The grey beard let's you know<br />
this dude is full of mad knowledge.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
An interesting thing to note here is the power that the
Bishop of Rome, that is, the Pope, had at this time. How is it that Victor had
the authority to excommunicate a whole region of churches and no one stated
that he could not do so? Think about it, for all of the detail that Eusebius
and Irenaeus put into their writings, not once did they ever mention that the
Bishop of Rome had no power to excommunicate! Quite the opposite occurs, numerous
bishops, as well as Irenaeus himself, implore the Bishop of Rome’s
sensibilities for him NOT TO excommunicate these churches. Hence, it can be
argued, the Early Church viewed Rome and the Bishop who resided there with
primacy.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Additionally, note at how St. Irenaeus says that Polycarp –
who was a directly apostle of St. John – couldn’t persuade Anicetus, the Pope
at the time, to reconsider the date for the Paschal Feast! I don’t know about
you, but, if a scholarly student of St. John told me that I was doing something
wrong, I’d not only believe him but, I’d immediately change in order to rectify
my actions! But, did Polycarp use this argument against the Bishop of Rome,
that is, did Polycarp use the fact that he knew the Beloved Disciple personally
as reason to get Anicetus to change his mind? No. He doesn’t even attempt to
correct him and, why should he<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Anicetus">?<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> St. Anicetus sits on St.
Peter’s throne</span></a> as the 11<sup>th</sup> Bishop of Rome and has all of the
authority that has been invested into that office! Very telling, how the
supremacy of the Bishop of Rome had already taken form by the early 2<sup>nd</sup>
century. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another Church Father that is mentioned by Eusebius is that
of<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolius_of_Laodicea"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">St. Anatolius
of Laodicea</span></a></span> (d. 288). In<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.xii.xxxiii.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Book 7,
Chapter 32, paragraphs 13-14</span></a></span> of <i>Church
History</i>, Eusebius makes mention of Anatolius’ <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf06.vi.iii.ii.i.html"><i><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Paschal Canons</span></i></a>. In this writing,
Anatolius points out that, since the date of the Jewish Passover was calculated
by the Jews and, many of the early Christians relied on the Jewish calendar for
the Easter celebration. Eventually, however, there arose a sense of doubt when
the Passover would fluctuate from one 14<sup>th</sup> day of the month to
another. So again we see that the date for Easter was indeed an issue: there
were those who wanted to celebrate it with the Jews on Nisan 14 (<a href="http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/486422/Quartodecimanism"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Quartodecimans</span></a>)
and those who want to distance themselves from the Jews and celebrate it on the
Sunday after the Jewish Passover.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This issue was officially resolved when the Catholic Church
convened at Nicaea. Near the end of the <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.vii.ix.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Nicene documents</span></a>,
we read the following: <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>We further proclaim to
you the good news of the agreement concerning the holy Easter, that this
particular also has through your prayers been rightly settled; so that all our brethren
in the East who formerly followed the custom of the Jews are henceforth to
celebrate the said most sacred feast of Easter at the same time with the Romans
and yourselves and all those who have observed Easter from the beginning.<o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Why do we celebrate Easter and how do we know it’s not from
Constantine’s pagan beliefs? Because the early church was celebrating it before
325 A.D. and it officially made Easter a Christian observance. All in all, the
early Christians simply wanted a day to honor our Savior’s resurrection by
fasting and feasting. Working from apostolic tradition, they all agreed that
the Paschal Feast should be celebrated but, differed on when and how to do it.
In order to unify the one and only Body of Christ, the Church Fathers at Nicaea
declared infallibly when it was to be observed. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Although no one can ever pin-point the exact date of when
Jesus resurrected, the date we observe and celebrate today is a reasonable
approximation with absolutely NO pagan festivals attached to it. Therefore, for
the rest of this Easter Season let us not concentrate so much on those who
mistakenly attempt to profane Easter but, on the completed work of Christ and
our application to it. <o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b>EXTRA TIDBITS</b></u><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
As an aside, there is one final Constantine myth that we
must also take into consideration. That being, the fallacious idea that
Constantine made Jesus into a God.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p> <table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5jK_XxwMcG6Gi-o_kdh3MwcehC8SOdzn7FsGkAgVenB9EK84VALELeHpcsmFgJ5MXwAqxAhQhMK8wpkgdnJ2it9744D4YtPzXrcKeoHmYZgk-NhFdJQqTu3a_JmXcq_iimGPc86f6FMw/s1600/images.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5jK_XxwMcG6Gi-o_kdh3MwcehC8SOdzn7FsGkAgVenB9EK84VALELeHpcsmFgJ5MXwAqxAhQhMK8wpkgdnJ2it9744D4YtPzXrcKeoHmYZgk-NhFdJQqTu3a_JmXcq_iimGPc86f6FMw/s1600/images.jpg" height="138" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"Hi, I'm John Constantine and I'm here to turn your <br />resurrected Messiah into a God. You can thank me later." </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One of the more prevalent myths out there is that
Constantine, by making Christianity legal in 313 A.D. and later calling the
Council of Nicaea for the early Church to hammer out their differences, made
Jesus divine in order to have stability and peace within his empire. This
argument states that, before Constantine, no one thought Jesus was God. This
lie was made popular by the Dan Brown novel <i>The
Da Vinci Code</i> and is regurgitated ad nauseam as bone fide fact by countless
ignorant minds who want to sound educated in ancient Christian thought. I won’t
go into great detail on why the early Church viewed Jesus as divine so,
instead, I’ll leave you some ante-Nicene quotes by some of our Church Fathers
that prove that the Early Church did in fact view Jesus as not only the Messiah
but, as God.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="background: white; color: #181818;">"Ignatius, also called Theophorus,
to the Church at Ephesus in Asia . . . predestined from eternity for a glory
that is lasting and unchanging, united and chosen through true suffering by the
will of the Father in Jesus Christ our God"</span></i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> <span style="color: #181818;"> </span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><b><span style="color: #181818;">- St. Ignatius of Antioch (</span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.ii.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><em>Letter to the Ephesians</em><span class="apple-converted-space"><i> </i></span>1</span></a><span style="color: #181818;"> [A.D. 110]).<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>“For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole
world even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and from
their disciples the faith in one God, Father Almighty, the creator of heaven
and earth and sea and all that is in them; and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of
God, who became flesh for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who announced
through the prophets the dispensations and the comings, and the birth from a
Virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the bodily
ascension into heaven of the beloved Christ Jesus our Lord, and his coming from
heaven in the glory of the Father to reestablish all things; and the raising up
again of all flesh of all humanity, in order that to Jesus Christ our Lord and
God and Savior and King, in accord with the approval of the invisible Father,
every knee shall bend of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth . . .
" </i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><b>- </b></i><b>St. Iranaeus (<a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.ii.xi.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><i>Against Heresies</i> 1:10:1</span></a>
– 189 AD)<o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>“The Word, then, the Christ, is the cause both of our
ancient beginning—for he was in God—and of our well-being. And now this same
Word has appeared as man. He alone is both God and man, and the source of all
our good things"</i> <span style="font-size: 14pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>– St. Clement of Alexandria (<a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.ii.i.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><em>Exhortation to the Greeks</em><span class="apple-converted-space"><i> </i></span>1:7:1</span></a> – 190 AD)<o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>“The origins of both his substances display him as man and
as God: from the one, born, and from the other, not born"</i><b> </b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>- Tertullian (<a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.vii.v.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><em>The Flesh of Christ</em><span class="apple-converted-space"><i> </i></span>5:6–7</span></a> – 210 AD)<o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>“Although he was God, he took flesh; and having been made
man, he remained what he was: God"</i><b> </b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>- Origen (<a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf04.vi.v.i.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><i>The Fundamental Doctrines</i> 1:0:4</span></a>
– 225 AD)<o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i style="font-family: inherit;">“One who denies that Christ is God cannot become his temple
[of the Holy Spirit] . . . </i><span style="font-family: inherit;">" </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="font-family: inherit;">- St. <a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_GoBack">Cyprian of Carthage
</a>(<a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.lxxiii.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><em>Letters</em><span class="apple-converted-space"><i> </i></span>73:12</span></a> – 253 AD)</b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>“‘Well, then,’ some raging, angry, and excited man will say,
‘is that Christ your God?’ ‘God indeed,’ we shall answer, ‘and God of the
hidden powers’"</i><b> </b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>- Arnobius (</b><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf06.xii.iii.i.xlii.html"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><i>Against the Pagans </i>1:42</span></b></a><b> – 305 AD)<o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">“He was made both Son of God in
the spirit and Son of man in the flesh, that is, both God and man" </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>– Lactantius (</b><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.iii.ii.iv.xiii.html"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><i>Divine Institutes </i>4:13:5</span></b></a></span><b><span style="font-family: inherit;"> – 307 AD)</span><o:p></o:p></b></div>
</div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-43075967643561245412014-04-22T13:13:00.001-04:002014-04-22T13:13:15.399-04:00Easter is pagan. NOT! <div class="MsoNormal">
HAPPY EASTER!<br />
<br />
It may be the Tuesday after Easter but, as Catholics, the Easter Season extends for the next 50 days until the Sunday after Pentecost, which is Trinity Sunday! Over the next 50 days I will be posting a set of posts dealing specifically with Easter. In this post I will debunk certain misconceptions about Easter, in particular, the notion that some people have as to the so-called "pagan origins" of Easter. So enjoy!<br />
<br />
Way too many people, especially some Protestants, have falsely and
wrongfully accused Roman Catholics of observing the “pagan” holiday/festival of
Easter. As far as most of these people are concerned, Easter is proof that
Catholicism has its roots in paganism and, therefore, cannot be a true
Christian religion. So, in this post I will attempt to disprove and dispel some
of these common (and ignorant) misconceptions in order to properly give meaning
to the historicity of Easter.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u>THE ISHTAR = EASTER "CONNECTION"<o:p></o:p></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
One of the common, if not THEE most often cited reason as to
why Easter <i>has to be</i> pagan is due to
the “fact” that it comes from the Springtime pagan festival of the goddess
Ishtar. As it is often cited in this erroneous “fact,” many claim that the name for
Easter itself comes from the name Ishtar or, from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astarte" style="color: #3d85c6;">Greek spelling of Ishtar which is
Astarte</a>*<span style="color: #3d85c6;">. </span>On the surface, it would seem logical to make the assumption that
Ishtar/Astarte = Easter.<br />
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRZodiE9t_vvTlGrSQjgH_3za9Oaryxn7CJvrFdvZqvCFWpNs0EUQ_bFDkSvgWDPSZXf8UrV1Zz01mlr3WuSxIIW2AV4J27Uyz4o5MPoqzjS3XBRRC4F1d9KUXRr6ro5GPbLUZEOJE8-g/s1600/photo1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRZodiE9t_vvTlGrSQjgH_3za9Oaryxn7CJvrFdvZqvCFWpNs0EUQ_bFDkSvgWDPSZXf8UrV1Zz01mlr3WuSxIIW2AV4J27Uyz4o5MPoqzjS3XBRRC4F1d9KUXRr6ro5GPbLUZEOJE8-g/s1600/photo1.jpg" height="320" width="249" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Facebook memes, the ultimate source of information.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
If we assume that Ishtar/Astarte is where we get the word
and the celebration of Easter from, we have to recognize that Ishtar was an
ancient Babylonian goddess who was worshiped in Mesopotamia in what is
currently present day Iraq. So, before we can fully dive into the origin of the
word Easter, let’s quickly look at what the "Easter is pagan" individual
has come to incorrectly presuppose to be the truth.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to them, Easter comes to us via the biblical
figure Nimrod. Nimrod was Noah’s great-grandson and, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+10%3A8-9&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">according
to Scripture</span></a>, he was “<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Chronicles+1%3A10&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">mighty
upon the earth</span></a>” as well as a “mighty hunter.” As <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+10%3A10-12&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Genesis
10:10-12</span></a> states, he was king of Babylon, Assyria Babel and, other kingdoms
- he was not only a strong ruler but, by all descriptions, he was a godless
despot as well; indeed, Ancient Jewish historian Josephus <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/josephus/complete.ii.ii.iv.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">stated</span></a> that
Nimrod was responsible for the Tower of Babel’s construction, this way, if God ever wanted to inundate the world again, he and his people could survive the flood by climbing the tower. Thus giving Nimrod the opportunity
to not only avenge his ancestors but, to take revenge upon God if He ever decided to flood
the world again.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhK13fY4h3hC2xxDV1rikuICktDvvtfZD1YTnTOhMB6Ht1WE5uAGF_jrbS2L817zH9KyKdO30s5iNIzlYnLRzx_wdSid1yeQoy5zi3fBHc9IFBrtJV-FM0lnCkxsx9-ho7n_gxu2iJSp6Y/s1600/photo0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhK13fY4h3hC2xxDV1rikuICktDvvtfZD1YTnTOhMB6Ht1WE5uAGF_jrbS2L817zH9KyKdO30s5iNIzlYnLRzx_wdSid1yeQoy5zi3fBHc9IFBrtJV-FM0lnCkxsx9-ho7n_gxu2iJSp6Y/s1600/photo0.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Nimrod also promised a sweet, hard rockin' guitar solo from<br />
atop the Tower of Babel.<br />
<br />
<br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Nimrod apparently was wedded to a woman named Semiramis. He was eventually killed and dismembered by an enemy and his body parts were
sent to different parts of his kingdom. Semiramis, being the new ruler, collected
all of the body parts but could not find Nimrod’s penis, this becomes somewhat important because, sometime later, Semiramis
is found to be with child. She tells her people that Nimrod has ascended
into the Sun and has become the Sun god, Baal, and it was through Baal - via
the rays of the sun - that she has become pregnant. She then set herself up as
a goddess, changes her name to Ishtar and, naturally, forms a new religion. She
eventually gives birth to a son named Tammuz and she is then proclaimed to be
the Queen of Heaven which does indeed have some biblical references: in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah+7%3A18&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Jeremiah
7:18</span></a> we see cakes and drinks being offered to her and in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah+44%3A17-25&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Jeremiah
44:17-25</span></a>, we see that incense is burned in her honor. Since her husband is
the sun-god, she becomes the goddess of the moon; she also becomes the goddess of
fertility due to the fact that she was able to miraculously conceive. Later on,
Queen Ishtar’s story would include the fact that she was born when a giant egg landed into the Euphrates River.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Her son, Tammuz, also is mentioned in the bible; he is mentioned
in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+8%3A14-16&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Ezekiel8:14-16</span></a> in which it is told that some women were wrongfully lamenting an idol
of Tammuz in the Jewish Temple as they prayed eastward toward the sun. Tammuz grows up and, much like his father, become
a mighty hunter who was fond of rabbits. Unfortunately, Tammuz is eventually gorged
to death by a wild boar and Queen Ishtar institutes 40 days of morning and
fasting in which her son - who was now one with his father - were both to be
worshiped. Queen Ishtar also stated that no meat was to be eaten during these 40
days as well.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Queen Ishtar becomes so powerful that she eventually became
a medium between her son and his sun-god father, so much so that if one of her
subjects wanted to contact or pray to the now deified Tammuz, they could pray
through Queen Ishtar.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So, let’s see what we have: a woman, who conceived a child from
God…<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxhfqCsM5RC1Am-3GWXoJkOqnELdF7CtnIPnhrko-UpIOhMMNCipTnVbwJT-OPo7-ZyR-66S2Nliq2bn-N1_xkXhCFb7qg46TH8bXrUUPdSNnDI6JJeAtD9MAnErl_jR0K28GGzrANM9o/s1600/photo2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxhfqCsM5RC1Am-3GWXoJkOqnELdF7CtnIPnhrko-UpIOhMMNCipTnVbwJT-OPo7-ZyR-66S2Nliq2bn-N1_xkXhCFb7qg46TH8bXrUUPdSNnDI6JJeAtD9MAnErl_jR0K28GGzrANM9o/s1600/photo2.jpg" height="316" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Hmmmmm, interesting.<br />
<br />
<br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
…became the Queen-Mother of her son who was a king…</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRn11Y1qIIs_QX-kXf3C0MFqlTOgPfPXEjKTxY15d94XHbEnLbhfReK_DuE5CGKw8jKkBJ26H8TXDZMiwBBpBNDMf5OZMRO2KoF7zU-zfAOCwuVMVbgA0VLaoR9mTT-L2fyJXGt19uhQk/s1600/photo3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRn11Y1qIIs_QX-kXf3C0MFqlTOgPfPXEjKTxY15d94XHbEnLbhfReK_DuE5CGKw8jKkBJ26H8TXDZMiwBBpBNDMf5OZMRO2KoF7zU-zfAOCwuVMVbgA0VLaoR9mTT-L2fyJXGt19uhQk/s1600/photo3.jpg" height="320" width="260" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Wait, a minute...<br />
<br />
<br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
…she had special cakes and drinks offered to her…</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCx8qzthbeiLynwPEFoqbdwmTa67SKy6i3k8REeF6TGl1Ihfgo_b1EMYCcKQsgiIEMyW09byRLho3nS5AUPXnW9cjwtyIYFZ4AntAzj3qpL4C9oYHomZNg9a_ZYwnFq-SzLBPgYd1q-mg/s1600/photo4t.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCx8qzthbeiLynwPEFoqbdwmTa67SKy6i3k8REeF6TGl1Ihfgo_b1EMYCcKQsgiIEMyW09byRLho3nS5AUPXnW9cjwtyIYFZ4AntAzj3qpL4C9oYHomZNg9a_ZYwnFq-SzLBPgYd1q-mg/s1600/photo4t.jpg" height="320" width="217" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">I don't like where this is going...<br />
<br />
<br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
…as well as incense…</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEignXeXC_-KuuXG0gcaM5D18rAH72_l6n_RLCgcZEJE5xWYva6R_tc6HuOnVYKjv4qL78e8S5PULCiXv2GHoRSv3rpKq0fcS0V755w4ri8dJ5RHigFpUOhqFeRD8JtUuqzRLaNUAKpBr1s/s1600/THT4F080450_pope-francis.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEignXeXC_-KuuXG0gcaM5D18rAH72_l6n_RLCgcZEJE5xWYva6R_tc6HuOnVYKjv4qL78e8S5PULCiXv2GHoRSv3rpKq0fcS0V755w4ri8dJ5RHigFpUOhqFeRD8JtUuqzRLaNUAKpBr1s/s1600/THT4F080450_pope-francis.jpg" height="213" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Uh, oh...</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
…her followers made her a mediator between her son after he
died…</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgr40HWg5RS80e3q4ptqxWavwCj38Hqcc_xpPOa95wZUAdzCA35EHqtjv4ogWbxYDmKsc3WKxlGgy5qmlaX5ccNiV3U_VI1Vm8F-ypjw0KnqCK0DdJG104mRfT_HTvI8a-HXNmvLKkBUa0/s1600/photo5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgr40HWg5RS80e3q4ptqxWavwCj38Hqcc_xpPOa95wZUAdzCA35EHqtjv4ogWbxYDmKsc3WKxlGgy5qmlaX5ccNiV3U_VI1Vm8F-ypjw0KnqCK0DdJG104mRfT_HTvI8a-HXNmvLKkBUa0/s1600/photo5.jpg" height="320" width="244" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Gasp!<br />
<br />
<br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
…and she was made into the moon goddess…</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGA8w3aGDUSDlrK_2DsJglsEpPrsq_ELw96zZKQ90NJEYSE0a1D7Jqy4jbNC_fSg9kBUCOamQt48vbwukc9f2KZV2IWeNFZLY-e-jhj8pVLYHbTK4XVOu8I_I75fq_iCh_IXhwXrxP8zE/s1600/photo6.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGA8w3aGDUSDlrK_2DsJglsEpPrsq_ELw96zZKQ90NJEYSE0a1D7Jqy4jbNC_fSg9kBUCOamQt48vbwukc9f2KZV2IWeNFZLY-e-jhj8pVLYHbTK4XVOu8I_I75fq_iCh_IXhwXrxP8zE/s1600/photo6.jpg" height="320" width="233" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The Blessed Mother with the moon at her feet! Oh no!<br />
<br />
<br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This can only mean one thing:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2gJl-rX6h9tIdQBtguqIhyphenhyphen3BMK4OevTA_mPnjpc2K2wjY2GKtUrXTCa2XiIeCzoqRWduWLBuNWga7jZfRAZVrIpNr8Wu3QJTS5lUPEnCRLGg7xz37OLrvPFSpF5fQsoQoJ8zrPDXoHwo/s1600/photo7.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2gJl-rX6h9tIdQBtguqIhyphenhyphen3BMK4OevTA_mPnjpc2K2wjY2GKtUrXTCa2XiIeCzoqRWduWLBuNWga7jZfRAZVrIpNr8Wu3QJTS5lUPEnCRLGg7xz37OLrvPFSpF5fQsoQoJ8zrPDXoHwo/s1600/photo7.jpg" height="208" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Catholicism = Pagan! NOT!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
I’ve just walked you through the path of the ignorant. As it is seen, one could certainly make a hard case for describing a fundamental element of Catholicism, namely the Virgin Mary, as having a pagan origin. Additionally, it can be ascribed that from the Ishtar legend, we also get the reason as to why we use the symbolism of rabbits and eggs; as it was stated earlier, Ishtar was born when an egg fell from the sky and dropped into the Euphrates. This was called Ishtar's egg and this is where we get "Easter egg" from. As for the rabbit symbology, that comes from Ishtar's son, Tammuz, who - as a hunter - was fond of the speedy little critters and this is where the so-called Easter Bunny came from.<br />
<br />
Pretty convincing theory, is it not? I mean let's be honest, that REALLY makes a good an compelling argument, it not only borrows facts from the bible, which no Christian can deny but, it also makes use of the mystical and historical religion of Ishtar. I mean, even the name "Ishtar" itself closely resembles the name "Easter"!!! Well, unfortunately, everything that you've just read is not only a lie but, a rather feeble attempt to debase the Catholic Church's Easter tradition. And, it was made mainstream by a Protestant minister named Alexander Hislop.<br />
<br />
Hislop got big time notoriety after the 1919 publication of his book, <i>The Two Babylons:Papal Worship Proved to be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife.</i><br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhhc8npEiGgsNbPefjKcsF-50YFXSZudQlXeAV9ldLiXIAv1PhcHzdRYLIJKne2C2fdexX6NnOEzQJ88RDs2SQDe2pjuQTshPs66OqJVrvbAAbZrR9a81BoRHHAdYz_ilMSX60AzhAnuc/s1600/ah5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhhhc8npEiGgsNbPefjKcsF-50YFXSZudQlXeAV9ldLiXIAv1PhcHzdRYLIJKne2C2fdexX6NnOEzQJ88RDs2SQDe2pjuQTshPs66OqJVrvbAAbZrR9a81BoRHHAdYz_ilMSX60AzhAnuc/s1600/ah5.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Alexander Hislop: Anti-Catholic, long winded title author<br />
and, a non-smiling expert.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Hislop's book is pretty much the tome for the entire modern day thought of Easter being pagan, since there literally exists no writing before Hislop that makes the very suspect Ishtar = Easter "connection." By looking backward through history - and through the lens of Protestantism - Hislop detailed in his book his personal view of why Catholicism is of the devil and "true" Christians must never follow Rome or her laws and instead follow the unbiblical notion of using the bible alone through faith alone. The interesting part about Hislop book is that it has been THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED as biased, incorrect and misinformed since it was first published at the beginning of the 20th century.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Honest and scholarly theologian Ralph Woodrow, a Protestant himself, once subscribed to Hislop's hypothesis. After much diligent study, however, Woodrow eventually came to the conclusion that Hislop's methodology was not only unsound but, many times, was found to be fabricated. Woodrow's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Babylon-Connection-Ralph-Woodrow/dp/0916938174/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1397830518&sr=1-1&keywords=ralph+woodrow" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1997 book</span></a>, <i>The Babylon Connection? </i>took Hislop to task and refuted many of Hislop's claim in light of all the new and historical information that has been found since Hislop first put pen to paper. Woodrow demonstrates that the pagan similarities Hislop's argument is based on, whether minute or made up, do not necessary equate Catholicism with paganism, that is, in many of Hislop's cases THERE IS NO CONNECTION.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And, many times, Hislop is grasping at straws. As Woodrow <a href="http://www.ralphwoodrow.org/books/pages/babylon-mystery.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">states</span></a> in regards to Hislop's methodology:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>"By this method, one could take virtually anything and do the same - even the "golden arches" at McDonald's! The Encyclopedia Americana (article: "Arch") says the use of arches was known in Babylon as early as 2020 B.C. Since Babylon was called "the golden city" (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+14%3A4&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Isaiah 14:4</span></a>) can there be any doubt about the origin of the golden arches?"</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The truly sad part of this misconception is that it continues to this day among more fundamentalist pastors. Megachurch evangelical pastor <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OygDw2m3z4U" style="color: #3d85c6;" target="_blank">John Hagee has already espoused this poison to his congregation</a>, so anti-Catholic is Hagee, that in 2008, he had to <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/05/13/mccain-backer-john-hagee-apologizes-to-catholics/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">issue an apology</span></a> for hurtful and ignorant slander against the Holy Catholic Church. <i>Passion for Truth Ministries</i>' pastor, <a href="http://passionfortruth.com/contentpages/18844/50b8b89f-45ed-4439-9049-52163b5b2af0/JimsBio.aspx" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Jim Staley</span></a>, has an <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EUAMyTYwno" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">8-part YouTube video series</span></a> in which he attempts to show how Easter is not Christian but wholly pagan. The interesting thing is that Staley, whether he knows it or not, goes STEP BY STEP through Alexander Hislop's fallacious and discredited treatise. Renown and fervent anti-Catholic, Jack Chick, has several tracks that distinctly make a point of "paganizing" the Roman Catholic Church, such tracts as<i><a href="http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0074/0074_01.asp" style="color: #3d85c6;" target="_blank"> The Death Cookie</a> </i>and <a href="http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0040/0040_01.asp" style="color: #3d85c6; font-style: italic;" target="_blank">Why Is Mary Crying?</a> heartily and mindlessly affirm Hislop's slop (pun intended) to the naive and uniformed as being the truth behind the Roman Catholic Church.<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> </span><br />
<br />
What the Ishtar/Astare = Easter contention boils down to is this:<br />
1) It was <u>invented</u> by an anti-Catholic Protestant in order to: a) paganize the RCC and discredit it and b) set up an entirely false notion that Catholics worship Mary as a goddess and thus, discrediting the RCC.<br />
2) This wrongful hypothesis has - literally - NO documentation of an Ishtar/Astarte = Easter connection prior to Hislop's writing<br />
3) Hislop's writings have been fully shown to be errant as well as misleading,<br />
<br />
In other words, to think that Ishtar's mystery religion is the basis for Easter is to not only endorse fiction but, to foolishly assert a lie perpetuated by a direct hatred for the Roman Catholic Church.<br />
<br />
<b><u>EOSTRE/OSTARA = EASTER</u></b><br />
A less used but often cited reason for Easter being pagan is due to the train of thought that it is based upon the goddess Eostre, or, in the Old Germanic, Ostara. Eostre is a pagan goddess that hails from the British Isles and was worshipped by the ancient Anglo-Saxons. She was honored during the month of April which was called by the pagan Anglo-Saxons, <i>Eosturmonath</i>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Very little is known about Eostre because ONLY ONE person EVER wrote anything about Eostre, that one person just so happens to be a Roman Catholic Saint. <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02384a.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Venerable Bede</span></a> (673-735 A.D.), wrote <i>The Reckoning of Time</i> in the late 7th century and, ALL that we know about Eostre is based on the following <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=yFsw-Vaup6sC&pg=PA54&lpg=PA54&dq=Eosturmonath+has+a+name+which+is+now+translated+%27Paschal+month%27+and+which+was+once+called+after+a+goddess+of+theirs+named+Eostre,+in+whose+honour+feasts+were+celebrated+in+that+month.+Now+they+designate+that+Paschal+season+by+her+name,+calling+the+joys+of+the+new+rite+by+the+time-honoured+name+of+the+old+observance&source=bl&ots=ghCij9vQYZ&sig=Y2SS7pWCpopQnCl8OgFSfI_JIu0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=E8pVU6TlDKGa8QHeg4HADw&ved=0CGQQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=Eosturmonath%20has%20a%20name%20which%20is%20now%20translated%20'Paschal%20month'%20and%20which%20was%20once%20called%20after%20a%20goddess%20of%20theirs%20named%20Eostre%2C%20in%20whose%20honour%20feasts%20were%20celebrated%20in%20that%20month.%20Now%20they%20designate%20that%20Paschal%20season%20by%20her%20name%2C%20calling%20the%20joys%20of%20the%20new%20rite%20by%20the%20time-honoured%20name%20of%20the%20old%20observance&f=false" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">two sentences that he wrote</span></a>:<br />
<br />
<i>"Eosturmonath has a name which is now translated "Paschal month," and which was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre, in whose honour feasts were celebrated in that month. Now they designate that Paschal season by her name, calling the joys of the new rite by the time-honoured name of the old observance."</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><br /></i>
<br />
Notice that Saint Bede <b>NEVER</b> once mentions anything with regards to the feasts that were held in her honor, nor does he describe the goddess herself, nor do we have any symbology to rabbits or eggs, nor is she mentioned to be worshipped with the Spring Equinox. Indeed, we know nothing about who Eostre was and we have no idea what her followers believed in or did to honor her.<br />
<br />
What Bede was doing was trying to describe an ancient calendar that was in use hundreds of years before his time and, more to the point, he was attempting to give reasons behind the names of these ancient English months. Having already gone in length with the Roman and Greek months, Saint Bede - who was English - starts off the <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=yFsw-Vaup6sC&pg=PA53&lpg=PA53&dq=The+English+Months+The+reckoning+of+Time+Bede&source=bl&ots=ghCijdyV4R&sig=b8bMotBsgNCQYZGMLZZzLGVrl0E&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RnRWU8DpKMWvyASxh4KIBQ&ved=0CF8Q6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=The%20English%20Months%20The%20reckoning%20of%20Time%20Bede&f=false" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">15th chapter of <i>The Reckoning of Time</i> </span></a>by stating:<br />
<br />
<i>"In olden time the English people - for it did not seem fitting to me that I should speak of other nations' observance of the year and yet be silent about my own nation's - calculated their months according to the course of the Moon. Hence, after the manner of the Greeks and the Romans, [the months] take their name from the Moon, for the Moon is called 'mona' and the month 'monath.'</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>The first month, which the Latins call January, is Giuli; February is called Solmonath; March is Hrethmonath; April, Eosturmonath; May, Thrimilchi; June, Litha; July, also Litha; August, Weodmonath; Semptember, Halegmonath; October, Winterfilleth; November, Blodmonath; December, Giuli, the same name by which January is called. They began the year on the 8th kalends of January [25 December], when we celebrate the birth of the Lord. That night, which we hold so sacred, they used to call by the heathen word 'Modranecht,' that is 'mother's night', because (we suspect) of the ceremonies they enacted all that night."</i><br />
<br />
It is at this point that Bede goes on to give an etymological reason for the names of the months. Basically, he took what he knew about the Old English language and, working backwards, attempted to give meaning to what those months meant using contemporary English words. If we were to continue in Chapter 15 of <i>The Reckoning of Time</i>, we see the following:<br />
<br />
<i>"The months of Giuli derive their name from the day when the Sun turns back and begins to increase...Solmonath can be called the "month of cakes," which they offered to their gods in that month. Hrethmonath is named for their goddess Hretha, to whom they sacrificed at this time...Eosturmonath has the name which is now tralsated 'Paschal month,' and which was once called after a goddes of their named Eostre...Thrimilchi was so called because in that month the cattle were milked three times a day...Litha means 'gentle' or 'navigable' because in these months the calm breezes are gentle and they were wont to sail upon the smooth sea. Weodmonath mean 'mont of tares,' for they are very plentiful then. Halegmonath means 'month of sacred rites.' Winterfilleth can be called by the invented composite name 'winter-full.' Blodmonath is 'month of immolations' for then the cattle which were to be slaughtered were consecrated to their gods. Good Jesu, thanks be to thee, who hast turned us away from these vanities and given us [grace] to offer to the the sacrifice of praise."</i><br />
<br />
Easily seen then is that Saint Bede was simply trying to explain where the name for the month of Eostremonath came from. As an Englishman, Saint Bede took the only word - IN ENGLISH - that made sense and attributed it to an ancient and relatively unknown goddess who apparently had a month named after her. The interesting thing here is that <u>NO</u> archaeological records exist for Eostre: no temples, no amulets, no ancient writings, no ancient pictures, no hymns, NOTHING. There are <u>NO</u> Anglo-Saxon records for such a goddess either, this is especially noteworthy considering that these Germanic peoples wrote about other gods, such as Odin, Thor, Frigga, Baldr and, many others. And yet, no mention about a goddess named Eostre! The only historical reference of such a goddess ever existing comes to us exclusively from a Roman Catholic Saint who speculated as to the origin of the name, of one of the months, of an ancient English pagan calendar. It is also interesting to note that Saint Bede finds it necessary to explain to the reader who Eostre was, proving that, nobody had ever heard of this goddess before.<br />
<br />
Eostre's story would have been lost had it not been for author, linguist and, German mythologist named Jakob Grimm who, in the early 19th century, re-envisioned this ancient goddess and renamed her Ostara. In his book, <i>Teutonic Mythology</i>,** Grimm states the following in regards to Eostre or, as he has termed her, Ostara:<br />
<br />
<i>"Ostara, seems therefore to have been the divinity of the radiant dawn, of upspringing light, a spectacle that brings joy and blessing whose meaning could be easily adapted to the resurrection-day of the christian's God...here also heathen notion seems to have grafted themselves on great christian festivals. Maidens clothed in white, who at Easter, at the season of returning spring, show themselves in clefts of the rock and on mountains, are suggestive of the ancient goddess."</i><br />
<br />
Gimm himself states that pagans, i.e., heathens tie themselves to Christian festivals which could be taken to mean that the "great Christian festivals" might just pre-date Eostre/Ostara worship. Lastly, it must also be stated that Jakob Grim is one-half of the famed Brother's Grimm.<br />
<br />
That's right, Jakob and his brother Wilhelm are responsible for such time honored classics as Cinderella, Snow White, Rapunzel, Hansel and Gretel and, <span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.grimmstories.com/en/grimm_fairy-tales/index" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">many other</span></a> </span>fairy tales; what this basically means is that the second oldest mention of Eostre being a goddess comes from an author of fairy tales, if that doesn't make you wonder at the validity of such a goddess ever existing, then you're simply not taking the facts into consideration.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKgicnIQYccvZlA-t8nSCZJsUFc6B1TiK9yJ8QnAO4mMWvzehrvUcs7s6opRzDa1vvwzmtmBjw8seBzZSXhZsv5vbmC1LqGzrfx3GCvqgHv6lshN7VwPE_5r5prTc-AOUqjABjmTRQ2H8/s1600/Ostara_by_Johannes_Gehrts.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKgicnIQYccvZlA-t8nSCZJsUFc6B1TiK9yJ8QnAO4mMWvzehrvUcs7s6opRzDa1vvwzmtmBjw8seBzZSXhZsv5vbmC1LqGzrfx3GCvqgHv6lshN7VwPE_5r5prTc-AOUqjABjmTRQ2H8/s1600/Ostara_by_Johannes_Gehrts.jpg" height="320" width="216" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">This is an picture of Ostara, circa 1901. Or, better stated, a picture of a goddess <br />1,200 years after she was first mentioned and who probably didn't even exist. <br />Note the symbolism of Easter in the picture added onto Eostre by the 20th century.<br /><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
So, to recap:<br />
1) Eostre was first mentioned as a goddess because a Roman Catholic Saint from the British Isles was trying to give a reason behind the ancient name of a month.<br />
2) There is absolutely NO historical record for such a goddess to have ever existed<br />
3) Eostre/Ostara = Easter was popularized in the 19th century by the Brother's Grimm, who are renown for their fairy tales.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><u>THE NAME GAME IS NO GAME AT ALL</u></b><br />
<br />
The final issue that we must address with all of these presumed goddess' is that of their names. The truly ignorant will casually make mention of how Ishtar, Astarte, Eostre, Ostara "look like" and "sound like" the word Easter. This is simply a linguistic and etymological error; In the case of Ishtar we must realize that she was worshiped in ancient Mesopotamia and the language spoken at that time was <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akkadian_language" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Akkadian</span></a>, a Semitic dialect whereas the word "Easter" itself, is an English word that comes from the Germanic language. Roughly stated, THERE IS NO WAY THAT AN ANCIENT AKKADIAN WORD COULD EQUATE AN ENGLISH WORD, there is simply no possible way that the Semitic word <i>Ishtar</i> - which predated the entire English language - could not of traveled over 3,000 miles from ancient Iraq to the British Isle to mean the same thing as a Germanic word before the Germanic language existed to give birth to the English word for Easter.<br />
<br />
As for Eostre, as it has already been stated, Bede simply used the English word "Easter" to denote the Old English pagan month for April. Given the fact that by Saint Bede's time Easter was being celebrated by the Christians, it is plausible that this Saint, as venerable as he may be, was wrong in associating a Christian observance with a goddess that may have never existed. Playing the "name game" with any ancient-to-modern words, or vice versa, requires a lot of proof and far too often words get bandied about as having this meaning or that meaning. Therefore, if anyone ever suggests that Easter comes from a pagan goddess' name simply because it "sounds/looks the same," one must be very careful as to not mix fact with fiction and, as I have demonstrated, the Ishtar/Astarte/Eostre/Ostara = Easter arguments, are all rooted in myth and fables that dissolve once they are thoroughly scrutinized.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
* <span style="font-size: x-small;">Ishtar/Astarte is biblically referred to as <span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblestudytools.com/encyclopedias/isbe/ashtoreth.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Ashtoreth</span></a> </span>as noted in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Kgs.11.5&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Kings 11:5</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges+10%3A6&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Judges 10:6</span></a>, and, <span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Samuel+7%3A4&version=KJV" target="_blank">1 Samuel 7:4</a></span></span><br />
**<span style="font-size: x-small;"> See <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=q1gOAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><i>Teutonic Mythology</i> Volume 1, page 291</span></a>.</span></div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-55519056115021886182014-03-05T11:48:00.000-05:002014-03-05T11:48:04.359-05:00Ash Wednesday: time to bone up on true Christian Tradition!Today, many devout - and some not so devout - Catholics will go to Mass and receive ashes. These ashes mark not only the beginning of the Lenten Season but they are also used to symbolize the need for repentance. Most Catholics understand this, many Protestants don't. To the average Protestant, the mentality is simple: "if it's not in the Bible, then you shouldn't do it." However, as I've mentioned many times in this blog, there are MANY things not in the Bible that most, if not all Protestants, believe in, like the term "Trinity" to describe God - it is never once used in Scripture or, ask your average bible-alone Protestant who wrote the Gospels and tell them to prove it using the Gospel (good luck finding any author's attribution in any of the Gospels!).<br />
<br />
This knee-jerk reaction is really quite ironic considering that the Bible, which they expound as their sole source of inspired authority* came directly from the very Church they state is not scripturally based. Therefore, let's look at some of the non-Catholic Christian attacks that we may encounter today...<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b><u>THE "WORKS BASED," NON-INTERNAL ARGUMENT:</u></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/jHsFaMsBGNc?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
These two Protestants claim 2 things that they deem are wrong with the observance of Ash Wednesday: 1) it is based on works and 2) it is merely an "outward thing." Additionally, they cite<span style="color: #45818e;"> <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+6:16" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Matthew 6:16</span></a></span> which does in fact say the following:<br />
<br />
<i>"When you fast, do not look somber as the hypocrites do, for they disfigure their faces to show others they are fasting. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full." </i>(KJV)<br />
<br />
One of the Protestant commentators then paraphrase verse 17-18 by stating that, instead of looking disheveled, we are to "comb our hair" and "wash our face" so that no one may know what you are doing accept God the Father, who already knows what we are doing and why you are fasting. The two commentators then proceed to build up the argument that God the Father wants an inward change and not an outward show and, therefore, ashes on the forehead mean nothing.<br />
<br />
Too bad that these two Protestants don't have a clue as to what Ash Wednesday is truly about! For starters, they fail in telling the TOTALITY of what ashes mean from the biblical view. These two guys absolutely negate the entirety of what ashes mean when they are spoken of in the bible and, since I don't want to be seen as a Christian who picks and chooses what he likes and doesn't like, let's see some Old Testament verses in regards to ashes (all quotes are from the KJV):<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Job+42:6" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;"><b>Job 42:6</b></span></a> - <i>Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes.</i><br />
Job confesses this statement right after he was rebuked by God.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Samuel+13&version=KJV" target="_blank"><b><span style="color: #45818e;">2 Samuel 13:19</span></b></a> - <i>And Tamar put ashes on her head, and rent her garment of diver colours that was on her, and laid her hand on her head, and went on crying.</i><br />
Tamar does this after being force to have sexual relations with her half-brother Amnon, something strictly forbidding in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=leviticus+18%3A11&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Leviticus 18:11</span></a>.<br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Esther+4%3A1-3&version=KJV" style="color: #45818e;" target="_blank">Esther 4:1,3</a> - </b><i>When Mordecai perceived all that was done, Mordecai rent his clothes, and put on sackcloth with ashes, and went out into the midst of the city, and cried with a loud and a bitter cry...And in every province, whithersoever the king's commandment and his decree came, there was great mourning among the Jews, and fasting and weeping and wailing; and many lay in sackcloth and ashes.</i><br />
This was Mordecai's reaction when the king, Haman the Agagite, vowed to kill the Jews because Mordecai would not bow to him. This reaction is explicitly made as a petition for Esther to intervene on behalf of the Jews, indeed in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Esther+4%3A16&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">verse 16</span></a>, Esther tells Mordecai and the Jews to fast and pray for her.<br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+61%3A3&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Isaiah 61:3</span></a> - </b><i>To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planing of the LORD, that he might be glorified.</i><br />
We find this verse in Isaiah's Book of Consolation, in which the prophet is speaking to the children of the exiled Jews and the hope that there is to come; here we see that Isaiah stating that they will receive beauty in exchange for ashes, that is, optimism for their sadness.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #45818e;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah+6%3A26&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;"><b>Jeremiah 6:26</b></span></a> </span>- <i>O daughter of my people, gird thee with sackcloth, and wallow thyself in ashes: make thee mourning, as for an only son, most bitter lamentation: for the spoiler shall suddenly come upon us.</i><br />
The prophet speaks of the evils that will befall Jerusalem if she doesn't return to the commands and ordinances of the LORD.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+27%3A30&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;"><b>Ezekiel 27:30</b></span></a> - <i>And shall cause their voice to be heard against thee, and shall cry bitterly, and shall cast up dust upon their heads, they shall wallow themselves in the ashes...</i><br />
Ezekiel speaks of the fall and undoing of Tyre. So bad where the goings on in Tyre that Jesus Himself parallels Korizin and Bethsaida in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt.+11%3A21&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Matthew 11:21</span></a>!<br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel+9%3A3&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Daniel 9:3</span></a></b> - <i>And I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer and supplications, with fasting, and sackcloth, and ashes...</i><br />
The beginning of David's confession and prayer to God.<br />
<br />
Ecclesiastical writer, Tertullian (160-220 AD), penned the following in <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.vi.ii.ix.html" style="color: #45818e;" target="_blank">Chapter 9 of his <i>On Repentance</i></a>, in regards to the penitent, he must, "lie in sackcloth and ashes and cover his body in mourning." In Eusebius' (260-340 AD) historic work, <i>Church History</i>, we read in <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250105.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Book 5, Chapter 24 paragraphs 11-17</span></a> that St. Ireneaus (?-202 AD) admonished Pope Victor for not being at peace with the traditions of fasting, he writes:<br />
<br />
<i>"For some think that they should fast one day, others two, yet others more; some, moreover, count their day as consisiting of 40 hours day and night. And this variety in its observance has not originated in our time; but long before in that of our ancestors. It is likely that they did not hold to strict accuracy, and thus formed a custom for their posterity according to their own simplicity and peculiar mode."</i><br />
<br />
Furthermore, in <span style="color: #45818e;"><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250105.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Book 5, Chapter 28 paragraphs 8-12</span></a> </span>of <i>Church History</i>, Eusebius writes about how Pope Zyphrinus accepted an excommunicated heretic back into the church after he repented; the heretic, Natalis, upon realizing that he was wrong, "put on sackcloth and covered himself with ashes, and with great haste and tears he fell down before Zephyrinus..." St. Cyril of Jerusalem (313-386 AD) in <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207.ii.xxii.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Chapter 18, paragraph 32 of his <i>Catecheical Lectures</i></span></a> explicitly mentions Lent. St. Cyril of Alexandria (376-444 AD) mentions <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=Z7B1wPk4WREC&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=cyril+of+alexandria+festal+letters&source=bl&ots=eMzR_zJCqO&sig=TpIlINM41P8VdwSL0UxPJsXp7ao&hl=en&sa=X&ei=d6QWU5fsMsG-rgGVyYG4Ag&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAQ#v=snippet&q=cyril%20of%20alexandria%20festal%20letters%20Lent&f=false" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">repeatedly in his<i> Festal Letters</i></span></a> how the Lenten season is observed by fasting. The very first ecumenical council at Nicaea in 325 AD, stated in <a href="http://www.ewtn.com/library/councils/nicaea1.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Canon 5</span></a>, that bishops should meet twice a year in order to verify that excommunicates have not been deprived the mercy of the Church over pettiness, it states that the bishops are to meet, "one time before Lent, so that, all pettiness being set aside, the gifts offered to God may be unblemished..." Pope St. Leo the Great (400-461 AD), in his<span style="color: #45818e;"> <a href="http://www.lectionarycentral.com/ashwed/Leo%20II.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">40th sermon <i>On Lent</i></span></a></span> delves into what the Lent seasons means to the Christian and, in his <a href="http://www.lectionarycentral.com/ashwed/Leo%20IV.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">42nd Sermon <i>On Lent</i></span></a>, states the following at the end of section I:<br />
<br />
<i>"...Divine Providence has with great beneficence taken care that the discipline of the forty days should heal us and restore the purity of our minds, during which the faults of other times might be redeemed by pious acts and removed by chaste fasting."</i><br />
<br />
In 601 Pope Gregory the Great moved the beginning date to a <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=sRzZAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270&dq=%22whereas+the+stations+of+Ash+Wednesday+and+the+following+days,%22&source=bl&ots=PiZowX6p0B&sig=yjsQbfUvCzUXy1eAnfgswOR96dA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=yrMWU9LVLeiR2QXwuYHoDg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22whereas%20the%20stations%20of%20Ash%20Wednesday%20and%20the%20following%20days%2C%22&f=false" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Wednesday in order to achieve 40 days</span></a>, sans Sundays, from the start of Lent to Easter as well as instituting the imposition of ashes on the forehead, it has remained unchanged ever since. This Tradition continued onto the Middle ages, when the Abbot of Eynsham, Aelfric (955-1020 AD) wrote in his <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=y8tZAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA263&lpg=PA263&dq=We+read+in+the+books+both+in+the+Old+Law+and+in+the+New+that+the+men+who+repented+of+their+sins+bestrewed+themselves+with+ashes+and+clothed+their+bodies+with+sackcloth.+Now+let+us+do+this+little+at+the+beginning+of+our+Lent+that+we+strew+ashes+upon+our+heads+to+signify+that+we+ought+to+repent+of+our+sins+during+the+Lenten+fast&source=bl&ots=dDtOdIwZBZ&sig=lrQcQFsjmQGyOH91mrgT6V5VtMk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SkcWU8SUMoWdkQeEwYDgCA&ved=0CEkQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=We%20read%20in%20the%20books%20both%20in%20the%20Old%20Law%20and%20in%20the%20New%20that%20the%20men%20who%20repented%20of%20their%20sins%20bestrewed%20themselves%20with%20ashes%20and%20clothed%20their%20bodies%20with%20sackcloth.%20Now%20let%20us%20do%20this%20little%20at%20the%20beginning%20of%20our%20Lent%20that%20we%20strew%20ashes%20upon%20our%20heads%20to%20signify%20that%20we%20ought%20to%20repent%20of%20our%20sins%20during%20the%20Lenten%20fast&f=false" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;"><i>Lives of the Saints</i> Chapter 12</span></a>, entited "The Beginning of the Fast" the following:<br />
<br />
<i>"We read in the books, both in the old Law and in the new, that men who repented of their sins bestrewed themselves with ashes, and clothed their bodies with sackcloth. Now let us do this little in the beginning of our Lent, that we strew ashes upon our heads, to signify that we ought to repent of our sins during our Lenten fast."</i><br />
<br />
Easily seen, is the undeniable fact that the bible, and Christian history, demonstrate that ashes are used in conjunction with repentance and penance. Indeed, as Catholics, the Lenten Season is just that: it is where we, as Christians, take stock of our mortality in light of Christ's redemptive act on the cross;. It is a time where the Church asks all Christians to truly ask for forgiveness via fasting and prayer and, to the bettering of ones soul. So, you see, using the outward sign of ashes as a sign of repentance is 100% BIBLICAL.<br />
<br />
In regards to the argument that this is a "works based" view of salvation, these two Protestant commentators forgot one very important thing about Matthew chapter 6: Jesus Christ Himself, lays out the rules for almsgiving (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt.+6%3A1-4&version=KJV" style="color: #45818e;" target="_blank">verses 1-4</a>), for praying (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt.+6%3A5-15&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">verses 5-15</span></a>) and for fasting (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt.+6%3A16-18&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">verses 16-18</span></a>), in other words, Christ tells us how to properly do these actions, that is, Christ tells us what we need <u>TO DO</u> spiritually in order to draw strength from God so that we may become pious! Once it is all read IN CONTEXT, it is absolutely astonishing at just how much bible-alone Protestant miss. Additionally, Jesus isn't talking to Catholics who observe Ash Wednesday in Matthew 6:16, he is speaking directly to the Pharisees who - when they fasted - made sure to utilize it as a tool so as to appear devout to others, hence why Jesus called them hypocrites.<br />
<br />
What is truly a bit ironic here is that both of these Protestants state that Ash Wednesday is of no use because it does nothing for the "inward man," that is, the only thing happening is on the outside and not on the inside. I say this is ironic due to the fact that they do not believe in works being able to justify man (a correct and wholly Catholic idea) and they, more than likely, prescribe to the <i>sola fide</i> principle that was invented by Martin Luther in the early 16th century. The real curious thing about Martin Luther's man-made notion is that he stated that righteousness in IMPUTED and not INFUSED; basically Martin Luther stated that man is justified by the legalistic act of simply believing. If you believe in Jesus, then God HAS TO justify you - even though you have not gone through any internal penance, repentance, change or spiritual transformation. All you have to do is believe and that's it, God counts you as righteous. Where as <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06701a.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">the Catholic view</span></a> maintains the following (<b>my emphasis </b>added):<br />
<br />
<i>"The Catholic idea maintains that the formal cause of justification <b>does not consist in an exterior imputation of the justice of Christ</b>, but in <b>a real, interior sanctification effected by grace</b>, which abounds in the soul and makes it permanently holy before God. Although the sinner is justified by the justice of Christ, inasmuch as the Redeemer has merited for him or her the grace of justification (causa meritoria), nevertheless he or she is formally justified and made holy by his or her own personal justice and holiness (causa formalis)"</i><br />
<br />
In other words, the Catholic view of being made righteous before God involves an internal change whereas the Protestant view of justification through the lens of <i>sola-fide </i>(faith alone) maintains that it is imputed and does not have to necessarily do anything to the heart of the believer. How funny, Ash Wednesday is bad because it does nothing for the inward part of man BUT, imputed justification is okay because it does nothing for the heart of man.<br />
<br />
<b><u>THE EARLY CHURCH DID NOT PRACTICE LENT, THEY THOUGHT IT WAS EVIL AND PAGAN!</u></b><br />
<b><u><br /></u></b>
<br />
<i><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;">"Howbeit you should know that as long as the primitive church retained its perfection unbroken, this observance of Lent did not exist."</span></i> <br />
- St. John Cassian,<a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf211.iv.vi.v.xxx.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;"> Conference XX, Chapter XXX</span></a> (360-435 AD)<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><i>"...Mithra there (in the kingdom of Satan,) sets his marks on the foreheads of his soldiers..."</i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"> - Tertullian, <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.iii.xl.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Prescription against Heretics, Chapter 40</span></a> (160-225 AD)</span><br />
<br />
<br />
While I won't go into the whole "Easter/Lent is pagan" argument (I'll save that for an up coming post!), I would like to show you 2 often used quotes of the Early Church Fathers that Protestants use in order to attempt to make the early Church seem anything but Catholic. The issue here is a common Protestant mistake, in that, they take 1 quoted passage out of its context and pass it off as part of their heretical belief system. However, if we take these passages in context and as a whole, these 2 quotes by the Early Church Fathers, are easily reconciled with Catholic theology. Let's quickly look at the first quote by St. John Cassian.<br />
<br />
If we were to continue to read St. John Cassian's 20th Conference on the origin of Lent, we would read the following:<br />
<br />
<i>"For they [the primitive church] were not bound by the requirements of this order, or by any legal enactments, nor confined in the very narrow limits of the fast, as the fast embraced equally the whole year round. But when the multitude of believers began day by day to decline from that apostolic fervour, and to look after their own wealth, and not to portion it out for the good of all the faithful in accordance with the arrangement of the apostles, but having an eye to their own private expenses, tried not only to keep it but actually to increase it, not content with follow the example of Ananias and Sapphira, then it seemed good to all the priests that men who were hampered by worldly cares...should be recalled to the pious duty by a fast canonically enjoined, and be constrained by the necessity of paying the legal tithes, as this certainly would be good for the weak brethren and could not do any harm to the perfect who were living under the grace of the gospel and by their voluntary devotion going beyond the law, so as to succeed in attaining the blessedness which the Apostle speaks of: "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for you are not under the law but under grace."</i><br />
<br />
What St. John Cassian is stating here is that the Lenten fast was made into canonical practice after the Church's faithful grew in number and started to include more of those who search after worldly riches. It was because of this that the Church decided to mark this season as one of self-reflection and repentance so that those faithful, who were more engrossed in worldly cares, could strip them off and become sanctified through the pious act of fasting, praying and repentance. So, you see, when taken in its entirety, St. John Cassian IS NOT going against the observance of Lent but, he is actually building the historically Christian case for it!<br />
<br />
Now, let's analyze Tertullian's quote. To begin with, Chapter 40 of <i>Prescription against Heretics</i>, is fully entitled:<br />
<br />
<i>No Difference in the Spirit of Idolatry and of Heresy. In the Rites of Idolatry, Satan Imitated and Distorted the Divine Institutions of the Older Scriptures. The Christian Scriptures Corrupted by Him in the Perversions of Various Heretics.</i><br />
<br />
In other words, Tertullian has set out to prove that Satan has imitated and polluted - through heretics - the true Christian Scriptures AS WELL AS Divine Institutions. Indeed, a thorough reading of Chapter 40 equates Satan as having the following:<br />
<br />
- Having a form of baptism<br />
- Remissions from sin<br />
- Marks on the forehead of his "soldiers"<br />
- The oblation of bread<br />
- Priests who are celibate<br />
<br />
If Satan emulates the sacred in order to perverse it, then, Chapter 40 of Tertullian's <i>Prescription against Heresy</i>, cannot be seen as a direct attack on the Catholic Church and her practices. On the contrary, Chapter 40 undeniably and unquestionably supports several Catholic observances! Indeed, if we take Tertullian at his word then it only makes sense that the things that Satan imitates HAVE TO be holy, inspired and sanctifying counterparts. The things that Satan twisted have to be Godly, therefore if we undo what Satan has done, we find the following:<br />
<br />
- Baptism, is a Sacrament<br />
- Confession is needed for the remission of sin<br />
- Ashes on the forehead for the faithful is sacred<br />
- The Sacrifice of the Mass, i.e., the oblation of bread, is divine<br />
- A celibate priesthood is orthodox<br />
<br />
Therefore, to use Tertullian as some sort of attack against ashes on the forehead during Lent is, to give acceptance to the Sacraments, Mass and, Traditions of the Catholic Church, for Satan would not imitate these things if in fact they weren't part of the economy of our salvation.<br />
<br />
In closing, we should constantly continue to remember that the Roman Catholic Church - the ONLY Church established by Christ and not by a man - is the Church of Christian history. No other church can ever state that. No other church can prove that they believe and practice exactly the same as the early Church and the early Church Fathers did. I did a little bit of research and I found out that the two Protestant commentators, belong to a church called the United Church of God which, <a href="http://www.ucg.org/about/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">according to their website</span></a>, was founded...drum roll please...in 1995. That's right, their church was invented 1,962 AFTER Christ established His Church! And yet, astonishingly, they have the gall to state this in their "About Us" page:<br />
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0BLPx6zs-h7x63olGvSH-2FKdAx0yX101w3Dp8UI6X4GHmhj2KE0vtd1jwo8R1HNODF4jqv51T5xL0EUuefvp5tgoDFYUMw6Mg_tMfttRDJUfFvgYmhk0p0st9sT_RDewdWDnzdDKXcU/s1600/Untitled-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0BLPx6zs-h7x63olGvSH-2FKdAx0yX101w3Dp8UI6X4GHmhj2KE0vtd1jwo8R1HNODF4jqv51T5xL0EUuefvp5tgoDFYUMw6Mg_tMfttRDJUfFvgYmhk0p0st9sT_RDewdWDnzdDKXcU/s1600/Untitled-1.jpg" height="80" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Incongruity, it seems to be commonplace with Protestants.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
That's right, they want to "mirror" the 1st century Christian's teaching of Jesus and the original apostles! Well, pray tell, how is that even possible if they estabished their church less than 20 years ago? How can they begin to mirror the 1st century Church if not through the writings of the Early Catholic Church Fathers? Oh, I know! They'll mirror the 1st century Christians by simply looking at the Sciptures! Okay, if that is the case, then they HAVE TO do certain things:<br />
<br />
<b>#1) They HAVE TO do away with the New Testament Scriptures.</b> You see, the New Testament Scriptures were not canonized as Scripture until the late 4th century, therefore, if the United Church of God (UCG) wants to be like the 1st century Christians, they must take into account <u>ALL</u> of the Christian writings that were written before 100 A.D. This would include the <i>Epistle to the Corinthians</i> by Clement of Rome (written around 95 A.D.) in which this <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Clement_I" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">future Pope</span></a> - who is also mentioned by name in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Philippians+4:3&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Philippians 4:3</span></a> - reprimands the Corinthians for removing ordained priest from office and instilling other men who were not ordained as their leaders. Hmmmmm, a high regard for a priesthood that cannot be undone by the laity, I wonder how many of the United Church of God members have remained loyal to their presbyters?<br />
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRixTvMo_KgKj_HgvOt6TGhONEAr7gLF3SQUwRTzLSsYDz0p1SRoxaoMF6oYvLjNfZSBm3pSKPwKMWTFBH0DKP8Z1-mzllSnJi8-2bEv3nj0E0e5M49ppLblSTtFFMfI5piSApSLN8vvA/s1600/Untitled-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRixTvMo_KgKj_HgvOt6TGhONEAr7gLF3SQUwRTzLSsYDz0p1SRoxaoMF6oYvLjNfZSBm3pSKPwKMWTFBH0DKP8Z1-mzllSnJi8-2bEv3nj0E0e5M49ppLblSTtFFMfI5piSApSLN8vvA/s1600/Untitled-2.jpg" height="70" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">It would seem that the UCG came about after it had disagreements with their original leaders, proving once again that Protestantism multiplies by dividing.<br /><div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Furthermore, they would also have to take into consideration <a href="http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">The Didache</span></a>. As one of the oldest of all Christian writings, there are several things the the UCG must adhere to if they want to mirror the 1st century teachings of the Apostles. Take for instance, Chapter 9 and 10 of the Didache which not only states <u>to do</u> a Eucharistic celebration but, that it is holy, only for the baptized and, not to forget to pray after receiving said Holy Communion! Gee, that sounds distinctly Roman Catholic to me. Additionally, the UCG would have to disavow John's Apocalypse (Book of Revelation) due to the fact that many biblical scholars put this book after the year 100 A.D., looks like that'll put a huge kink in <a href="http://www.ucg.org/booklet/book-revelation-unveiled/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">their end-times biblical prophesies</span></a>.<br />
<br />
<b>#2) Since the NT Scriptures were not part of the 1st century Scriptures, the UCG has to rely solely on orally transmitted knowledge. </b>That is, they cannot use the written word and can only go off of what they heard and remember; good luck not changing the teachings of Jesus as your church grows UCG! Without an inspired Magisterium to preserve and teach correctly, your church will become a footnote in the heretical history of Christianity soon enough. Instead of trying to be like the 1st century Church, why don't you join the 1st Century church, i.e., the Roman Catholic Church? Silly Protestants.<br />
<br />
All in all, the custom of observing Ash Wednesday not only has historical backing but it predates any Protestant church. So, to all of my devout Catholic friends, make sure you ask the anti-Catholic, "Ash Wednesday isn't in the Bible" Christian the following: "What was your church doing in the 1st century? What was it doing in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th century? Do you still have the same teachings and beliefs from back then? Who was your church's leader during that time? Can you produce a document that demonstrates your church's leaders? Or, was your church invented less than 20 years ago?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
*<span style="font-size: x-small;">Any time a bible-only Protestant makes the statement that the Bible is inspired, ask them to show where, in each of their 66 books, it explicitly states that the book is inspired. We as Catholics know for sure that it is inspired for <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/p/new-on-catholic-churchs-authority.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">it came from the unerring and spiritually protected Magisterium</span></a>.</span>Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-91026861668052495512013-12-10T15:43:00.000-05:002013-12-11T11:39:43.956-05:00Justification by Faith Alone? A look at Scripture and how the Catholic view of Justification is proven. Part 4<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b>[NOTE: This post was to have been posted yesterday, 12/9/13. For some reason, it didn't post when I scheduled it to. My apologies to those who visited this blog yesterday only to be kept waiting.]</b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is the last and final post that will be dedicated to the subject of Justification for the 450th anniversary since the close of the Council of Trent. This will be BY FAR the longest of this series due to the extensiveness of the New Testament works. While I wasn't able to do all of the passages and verses that prove the Catholic view on Justification, the ones that I present were chosen so that a reader can understand how an important verse or passage can easily be used to verify the Catholic position.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Additionally, when necessary I have also stated brief introductions into certain NT books so that the reader can have some background knowledge as to <i>who</i> the NT work was addressing and <i>why</i> it needed to be addressed. Since the NT works contain some of the most quoted verses used by Protestants to "prove" <i>sola fide</i>, I have placed a red exclamation (<span style="color: red;">!</span>) before any of these quoted passages so that the reader may be able to find them quickly and see the full explanation behind the Protestant misinterpretaton.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As always, <u>ALL scripture verses were taken from the Protestant KJV Bible.</u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><br /></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><span style="background: white;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Corinthians%205:8-10&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2
Corinthians 5:9-10</span></a></span></b><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent
from the body, and to be present with the Lord. Wherefore we labour, that,
whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him. For we must all appear
before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done
in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.<o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here we see that
one MUST labor in order to be accepted by Christ, additionally, what one receives
in the afterlife depends on what they
did while they were on earth as part of the Body of Christ. So what man has
done, his works, are integral to his salvation!<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: red;">!</span><span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%202:16&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Galatians
2:16</span></a></span></span></b><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Knowing that a man is not justified by the
works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in
Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the
works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is one of
the most oft quoted passages by Protestants in order to legitimize
justification by faith alone. To the unsuspecting reader, this passage sounds
like it endorses the notion of <i>faith
alone</i> but, what we need to ask ourselves is the following: what is St. Paul
talking about when he says that the “works of the law” shall not justify? When
St. Paul uses that phrase, HE IS NOT referring to all works, HE IS NOT saying
that no matter what you do, what sins you commit or, what works you wrought, that those things have nothing to do with justification. In Paul’s time there were many Jews – to
whom he was writing – who believed that to be justified they had to do certain
things as prescribed the Old Testament system, such as kosher dietary laws and
circumcision. In other words, they believed that early Christian converts had
to live like Jews by requiring these new Christians to observe the Old
Testament mandates.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text">So, when St. Paul
says that “</span><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">by the works of the law shall no flesh be
justified,”</span></i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> He is trying
to tell his readers that the Old Testament system has been done away with and
is no longer necessary; he is basically telling them that they do not have to
follow the old law, you do not have to abide by it, you do not have to observe
it or be incorporated into it in order to be part of God’s family or to be a
true convert and to achieve salvation. THIS IS what St. Paul is saying when he
refers to the “works of the law.” <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The proof for
this correct and biblical interpretation, can be seen just 2 verses earlier in
Galatians 2:14, which just so happens to be a verse that anti-Catholic
Protestants might be familiar with,<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%202:14&version=KJV"><b><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Galatians
2:14</span></span></b></a><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">But when I saw that they walked not
uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them
all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do
the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">This verse has
St. Paul confronting St. Peter for behaving less than piously in front of his
fellow Jews and confounding them as well (see </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%202:13&version=KJV"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">verse 13</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">). Anti-Catholic Christians love this passage because it
demonstrates that St. Peter, our first Pope, to be simply a fallible man in
need of correction and not the infallible leader of Christ’s one true Church.
While I won’t go into the doctrine of papal infallibility here, suffice it to
say that MANY Protestants believe that we Catholics view the Pope as God on
earth! Some Protestants believe that we pray to the Pope as if he were God,
some believe that Catholics think the Pope cannot sin or, that we revere him as
if he were Christ reincarnated…how foolish. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">The fact of the
matter is that no good Catholic believes this: the pope is a man, he is simply
the leader of the Church and, by our current popes own statement, </span><a href="http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1304891.htm"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">he too is in need of the Sacrament of Confession</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">. This passage in no way diminishes the
office of the Papacy, it does however, destroy the <i>sola fide</i> argument; it demonstrates that, immediately after
speaking about St. Peter trying to influence a convert to live like a Jew by
observing the Old Testament prescriptions in verse 14, St. Paul goes right into
the “works of the law” in verse 16. St. Paul is clearly connecting the two
points, he is noting that the Old Testament law and its works are no longer
needed, hence the reason for Paul confronting Peter. Paul IS NOT stating that good works are not needed, he is EXPLICITLY and
precisely stating that the Old Testament
system is of no use to the true believer. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Additionally, there are many
instances in Galatians in which “the law” and the Old Testament prescriptions
for their works are clearly noted (See </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%206:13&version=KJV"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Galatians 6:13</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> & </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%205:3-4&version=KJV"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Galatians 5:3-4</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">) </span><span class="text"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%205:19-21&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Galatians 5:19-21</span></b></a><span class="text"><b> states:<o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these;
Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,</i></span><i> <span class="text">idolatry,
witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell
you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such
things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.</span></i><b><o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here we have a
list of <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+5%3A16-17&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">mortal sins</span></a> that condemn an individual, that is, things that are done
separate you from God. St. Paul here is not talking to unbelievers, quite the
contrary, IN CONTEXT it is obvious from the proceeding verses that he is
talking to the believers of Christ at the church in Galatia. Therefore if these
early Christians who, had access to the wisdom of St. Paul AND believed in
Christ by faith, if even these weren’t saved by faith alone in Christ, why
should modern day Protestants boast anything differently?<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%206:7-8&version=KJV"><b><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Galatians
6:7-8</span></span></b></a><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man
soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the
flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit
reap life everlasting.</i></span><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">One important
thing to consider in this passage is the fact that St. Paul tells the believers
of Galatia not to be deceived, if believers in Christ are saved by “<i>faith alone</i>” then why are they exhorted
not to be duped? The only way that this makes any sense is to come to the
conclusion that they are not saved yet and that their works have a significant
bearing on their salvation. Additionally, St. Paul contrasts planting “in the
flesh” and planting “in the spirit.” The term planting here means, literally, <i>to do</i> something, <i>to cultivate</i> something or, <i>to make something come about</i>; Paul is stating that
the things we do, either the things of the flesh or the things of the spirit
will determine whether or not we go to heaven. Hence if we do things of the
flesh, in the flesh and for the flesh, we will reap corruption versus doing
things of the Spirit, in the Spirit and for the Spirit which will give us
everlasting life.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians%205:5-8&version=KJV"><b><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Ephesians
5:5-8</span></span></b></a><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person,
nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of
Christ and of God.<b><sup> </sup></b>Let no man deceive you with vain
words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of
disobedience.<b><sup> </sup></b>Be not ye therefore partakers with them.</i></span><i> <span class="text">For
ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children
of light:<o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">This passage
shows that a true believer, a person with authentic faith, can be excluded if
they commit any of the <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+5%3A16-17&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">mortal sins</span></a> that are mentioned. Notice that right after listing those sins,
St. Paul says “</span><span class="text"><i>Be not ye therefore partakers with them,</i>” indicating that it is possible for true believers to be
partakers of these mortal sins which will separate them from God, furthermore,
there is absolutely no mistaking the fact that he is talking to true believers because St.
Paul calls them “children of light,” that is, true believers who have received
the light of Christ. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text">The infallible Word of God clearly states that believers
can be excluded from heaven, regardless of their faith for what they have done.
This passage not only destroys the <i>sola
fide</i> argument but the Calvinistic Protestant invention of guaranteed
salvation for a true believer.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><span style="color: red;">!</span><span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcmZQS3y81E"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Ephesians 2:8-9</span></a></span></b><span class="text"><b> states:<o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of
yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.</i><b><o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">While it could be
argued that St. Paul is speaking about the works of the Old Testament laws,
here we see that St. Paul is talking, specifically, about the initiation of
justification, that is, what initiates our justification? St. Paul states here
that it is the supernatural grace of God and no work of man that saves us. In
light of this, we must ask ourselves, what is it that initially gives us the
grace of God which bestows us with the faith to do works in order to attain salvation?
What is the one thing that takes away original sin as well as all sin so as to
justify us before God? The answer is simple: Baptism.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text">As noted in the </span><a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2013/12/justification-by-faith-alone-look-at_6.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">last
post</span></a><span class="text">, John 3 mentions that in
order for us to get to the Kingdom of Heaven, Christ states that we must be
“born again” through water baptism. This is what St. Paul is describing here in
Ephesians 2:8-9 when he states that justification “is not of works” because there
is no work that one can do which can substitute the Godly grace imparted at
baptism; it is God’s work which must renew your soul in the grace of baptism.
How do we know that it is baptism which St. Paul is talking about here? Let’s
look at the following two passages:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%203:20-21&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Peter 3:20-21</span></b></a><span class="text"><b> states in part:<o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>…</i></span><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">baptism doth also now save us…<o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Notice that the
language is extremely similar to Ephesians 2:8-9 which mentions, “<i>by grace ye are saved through faith</i>,”
and, in particular, the second part of the passage states, “</span><span class="text"><i>and
that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.” </i>In light of 1 Peter 3:20-21, what gift could God possible
give us that imparts His saving grace if not baptism? Additionally, the
language in 1 Peter 3:20-21 is also similar to that of Titus,<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=titus%203:5&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Titus 3:15</span></b></a><span class="text"><b> states:<o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Not by works of righteousness which we
have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of
regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;</span><span class="text"><o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">All three of
these passages are talking about the same thing, they are making the
regeneration of water baptism, which is made explicitly clear in 1 Peter
3:20-21 which IS IDENTIFIED as “faith” in Ephesians 2:8-9! That’s right, In
Ephesians 2:8a when St. Paul states, “</span><span class="text"><i>For by grace are
ye saved through faith,”</i> he is stating
that we are saved through baptism, if you think that this is stretching out the meaning of Ephesians 2:8-9, then look at Galatians chapter 3:23-27,<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=galatians%203:23-27&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Galatians 3:23-27</span></b></a><span class="text"><b> states:<o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up
unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our
schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But
after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. For ye are all
the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.</i></span><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"> </span><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">For as many of you as have been baptized
into Christ have put on Christ.</span></i><b><o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here we see
numerous references to the faith only to be explained in the final verse as
being baptism. Therefore, in Ephesians 2:8-9 we can clearly state that baptism
is described as being the “faith” in the same way that Galatians 3:23-27 states
that the faith is baptism. They are used interchangeably because baptism is the
way in which a person is incorporated into the faith and brought into
justification, hence the reason as to why St. Paul calls it as the way “<i>ye are saved”</i> because it is the way in
which one is initially justified. That’s why St. Paul says that it is not of
works that saves man but God. Therefore it is by the action of baptism, as well as the
work that is done in baptism, that gives us the faith that we need in order to
do the good works that God has destined for us to do.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What a drastic
mistake that <i>faith alone</i> Protestants
have made in interpreting this passage to mean something that it does not! <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Phillipians%202:12&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Phillipians 2:12</span></b></a><span class="text"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;"> </span>states:<o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always
obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out
your own salvation with fear and trembling.</span><span class="text"><o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">St. Paul tells
the believers to “work out” their salvation with fear and trembling, obviously
because they can lose their salvation at any time through grave sin or evil
works. This verse completely contradicts the Protestant notion of “once saved,
always saved” and proves the Catholic position for works.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians%201:21-23%20&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Colossians 1:21-23</span></b></a><span class="text"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;"> </span>states in part: <o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">And you, that were sometime alienated… yet
now hath he reconciled…</span><span class="text"> In
the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and
unreproveable in his sight: If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here again we see
that even a true believer isn’t justified by faith alone; this verse shows that
true believers, those who have been reconciled and can in fact lose their salvation and
justification if the fail to continue in the faith.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians%202:18%20&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Colossians 2:18</span></b></a><span class="text"><b> states in part:<o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Let no man beguile you of your reward…<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">Here we see that
true believers can be tricked out of their eternal reward! We know that St.
Paul is talking about true believers because just 6 verses before in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians%202:12%20&version=KJV"><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">verse 12</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">, we read about those who have been baptized and have faith
in Christ, therefore, faith alone in Christ is not enough, for even a believer
can be mislead out of salvation!<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians%202:20-23&version=KJV"><b><span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Colossians
2:20-23</span></span></b></a><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> states in part:<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>(Touch not; taste not; handle not;</i></span><i> <span class="text">Which
all are to perish with the using;)…</span></i><span class="text"><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><span class="text"><br /></span></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text">Here St. Paul EXPLICITLY
states, to the true believers (see above), that the things that they do can
cause them to lose salvation.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Thessalonians%201-11&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2
Thessalonians 1:3-11</span></b></a><span class="text"><b> states in
part:<o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>We are
bound to thank God always for you, brethren, as it is meet, because that your
faith groweth exceedingly, and the charity of every one of you all toward each
other aboundeth…when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his
mighty angels…When he shall come to be glorified in his saints…Wherefore also
we pray always for you, that our God would count you worthy of this calling.</i><b><i><o:p></o:p></i></b></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If all believers are in fact saved, why did Paul
state that a true believer, who’s faith “growth exceedingly,” must still prove
themselves to be worthy before God and therefore makes an impactful blow
against <i>sola fide</i>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%202:15&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Timothy 2:15</span></b></a><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;"> </span>states:<o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>Notwithstanding
she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and
holiness with sobriety.</i><b><o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">St. Paul clearly states that women will be saved
IF they continue in faith, charity and holiness. So, if a female adherent believes but
stops having faith, charity and holiness, then she forfeits her eternal
reward…even though she had faith at one point. Proving that faith alone does not justify because said faith can be lost.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%203:1-6&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Timothy 3:1-6</span></b></a><b> states in part:<o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>…lest
being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. </i><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> St. Paul here is mentioning
a recent convert can fall into the condemnation of the devil and thus, loose
his salvation.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%204:16&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1
Timothy 4:16</span></b></a><span class="text"><b> states: <o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Take heed
unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou
shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here we see that just believing is not enough
but, IN ADDITION TO faith we must also believe in true Christian doctrines and
– as St. Paul states – by DOING THIS, we shall save ourselves. Faith alone? Not
according to St. Paul, you <u>have to do something</u> in cooperation with God’s Grace
in order to be saved.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%205:8%20&version=KJV"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Timothy 5:8</span></b></a><b> states:<o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>But if
any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath
denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.</i><b><o:p></o:p></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Believers can deny the faith and become worse
than an infidel, that is, one that does not have any faith at all!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Timothy%202:10"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2 Timothy
2:10</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Therefore
I endure everything<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>for the sake
of the elect,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>that they too may
obtain the salvation<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>that is in
Christ Jesus, with eternal glory.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></i><br />
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">St. Paul is saying that, in what he endures – what he suffers –
has a part in whether or not people will attain salvation. In other words, the
works that St. Paul is doing, can have a direct bearing on the salvation of
believers. We can again ask: if <i>sola fide</i>
is a true Christian doctrine, why does Paul even bother to state this?<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Timothy%204:6-7&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2
Timothy 4:6-7</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>For I am now
ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a
good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:</i></span><i><o:p></o:p></i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><br /></i></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">St. Paul indicates here that faith was a labor to the end and not
a once for all action. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Timothy%204:14&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2
Timothy 4:14</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Alexander
the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works:<o:p></o:p></span></i><br />
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here we have a definitive statement by St. Paul which shows us
that people will be rewarded or punished on the basis of their works.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%203:6&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews
3:6</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>But
Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the
confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.</i><span class="text"><i><o:p></o:p></i></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The author of
Hebrews is clearly saying that he and other believers would not be of “Christ’s
house” if they did not continue to hold fast to the things he has preached.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%205:9&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews
5:9</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And being made perfect, he became the
author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This verse
totally refutes justification by faith alone since here we are told that
salvation comes to those who remain obedient to God’s law.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%206:4-6%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews
6:4-6</span></a> states</span></b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened,
and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy
Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to
come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they
crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.</i></span><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This passage
devastates the Protestant invention of “once saved, always saved.” Here, the
author of Hebrews states EXPLICITLY that if true believers fall away it is
“impossible to renew them again unto repentance.” While this doesn’t mean that
a sinner can't get back into God’s good graces, what the author here is noting is that the initial grace of baptism cannot be repeated. One cannot be baptized again, hence, the reason why it is
“impossible” to “renew them again unto repentance.” The point here is clear
though: even a believer who has been justified can fall away and lose their
justification.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2010:26-27&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews
10:26-27</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the
knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a
certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall
devour the adversaries.</i></span><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This passage
shows that those who have justification can lose their justification by
sinning, thus establishing the Catholic view and doing away with the Protestant
view.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2012:14&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews
12:14</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Follow peace with all men, and holiness,
without which no man shall see the Lord:<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So, holiness and
peace are needed in order to attain salvation. Why would the author of Hebrews
states this if, according to most Protestants, ONLY <i>faith alone</i> is needed? Here we note that true justification comes
only through sanctification and not, as the Protestants claim, that the
righteousness of Christ has to be <a href="http://www.theopedia.com/Imputed_righteousness"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">imputed</span></a> or applied to
that person even though he interiorly is unrighteous or unholy.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><u><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">NOTE ON THE BOOK OF JAMES:</span></u></b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">More than any
other book in the New Testament, the Book of James lays out with exactness and
clarity that works are not only needed for justification but, as we shall see,
that faith without works is no faith at all! So troublesome was this book that
Martin Luther wanted it gone from his personal abridged bible <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther's_canon#Hebrews.2C_James.2C_Jude_and_Revelation"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">along
with Hebrews, Jude and Revelation</span></a> in addition to the entire
deuterocanonicals (apocrypha) which had been part of Christian scripture for over 1,500
before the Protestant Reformation. Martin Luther wanted James out so bad that
he dared to call it “an epistle of straw” and, in his <a href="http://www.bible-researcher.com/antilegomena.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1522 Preface to James</span></a>,
he stated the following (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b>):<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">“Therefore, I
will not have him [James] in <b><i>my</i></b> Bible to be numbered among the
true chief books…”<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Nice to know that Luther made his own personal Bible in order to spread his personal heresy. The real question
any Lutheran or any other Protestant needs to ask themselves is this: if Martin
Luther was wrong about wanting to take out Hebrews, Jude, James and Revelation,
could also he be wrong about dumping the apocryphal works? If he was wrong
about wanting to rid <u>his own personal bible</u> of 4 books that all
Protestants claim to be inspired, could he also be wrong about his view of
justification?<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%201:12&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">James
1:12</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Blessed is the man that endureth
temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the
Lord hath promised to them that love him.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">It is quite
clear, the true believer must endure temptation and must go through trials in
order to “receive the crown of life.” Faith alone, in and of itself, is not
enough.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%201:13-15&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">James
1:13-15</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for
God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But every man is
tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust
hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth
death.</i></span><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If one concedes
to sins of lust, it brings forth eternal death. Man is not justified by faith
alone because a man can lose his eternal salvation if he commits <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+John+5%3A16-17&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">mortal sins</span></a>.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4SfS11qGfHjNYPTwuXa9TxsQghA7dWYG3wEmkYUKGKJnhopArt8EUne3_Tw4eNGVQxucDgw5Hfxu6lfT_PvYwoyacDEqiaEre1G0n0BS1E7pUBxLyETeAm6j6JAbgI0A0SdpHIyWmE4w/s1600/30637699.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4SfS11qGfHjNYPTwuXa9TxsQghA7dWYG3wEmkYUKGKJnhopArt8EUne3_Tw4eNGVQxucDgw5Hfxu6lfT_PvYwoyacDEqiaEre1G0n0BS1E7pUBxLyETeAm6j6JAbgI0A0SdpHIyWmE4w/s320/30637699.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Click <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/James%202:24" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">here</span></a>!</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Next to the Book of Romans, James 2 is addressing the topic of justification directly and</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> EVERY good Catholic should be well versed in this particular chapter! Since James 2 is chocked full of verses that prove faith + works = justification, I won’t go into detail but merely quote the
important verses in James 2 which speak for themselves.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%202:14&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">James
2:14</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What doth it profit, my brethren, though a
man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?<o:p></o:p></span></span></i><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%202:17&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">James
2:17</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Even so faith, if it hath not works, is
dead, being alone.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%202:20-21&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">James
2:20-21</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is
dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac
his son upon the altar?</i></span><b><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%202:24&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">James
2:24</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Ye see then how that by works a man is
justified, and not by faith only.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%202:26&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">James
2:26</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For as the body without the spirit is
dead, so faith without works is dead also.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2vfAE41S5h952Q2vU2D9eqv2dpIk5-O9JGD26ZVVSDtsCYCoojN9aFQh1nC60oCHKP5bsN-dHUiugxwNCqqwy1QaDApX2qfPNWCnJ9ldjOdmhYQ2Nmc7-L3wqPdQ-XbdJWZqkUjqy4Bs/s1600/6339dcd1d2b17c1121f00172e89f843be55c059701d5860277f0e6d63ef6dc2d.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2vfAE41S5h952Q2vU2D9eqv2dpIk5-O9JGD26ZVVSDtsCYCoojN9aFQh1nC60oCHKP5bsN-dHUiugxwNCqqwy1QaDApX2qfPNWCnJ9ldjOdmhYQ2Nmc7-L3wqPdQ-XbdJWZqkUjqy4Bs/s320/6339dcd1d2b17c1121f00172e89f843be55c059701d5860277f0e6d63ef6dc2d.jpg" width="310" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Even the King
James Version (KJV) of the Bible, the one most Protestants use, clearly and
EXPLICITLY states that works are a necessary part of salvation and that faith
alone DOES NOT justify. The Bible, that is, the Word of God, condemns the
Protestant view. It condemns the view invented by Martin Luther, a mere man who - after becoming a Catholic priest, apostatized, and fashioned his own man-made
religion.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><u><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">NOTE ON THE BOOK OF ROMANS</span></u></b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Much like in Book
to the Ephesians, St. Paul states in the Book of Romans the phrase “works of
the law” several times in which he is directly refering the Old Testament
system and its requirements. This is the key to understanding the Book of
Romans, St. Paul is emphasizing to the Jews that they do not need the Old Law
anymore; if a reader of Romans does not understand this basic aspect, then they
will fall into the drastic error that so many proof-text reading, bible alone
Protestants tend to fall into. A good
example of this can be found in Romans chapter 3,<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="color: red;">!</span><span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%203:28&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
3:28</span></a></span> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Therefore we conclude that a man is
justified by faith without the deeds of the law.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Protestants love
to quote this verse in a vain attempt to prop up the ill-conceived and
unbiblical stance of <i>faith alone</i>.
But, as I have already demonstrated from our look at Ephesians, when Paul states any works of “the law,” he is pointing his
audience to the Old Testament system AND NOT to works done by Christ’s faithful
which do in fact justify (See James 2). Additionally, if we take note at the
very <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%203:1&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">first
verse of Romans 3</span></a>, we see that St. Paul address the idea of circumcision
and how it is of no use within the New Covenant established by
Christ. Continuing on, let’s look at Romans chapter 2 a bit more closely.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202:3&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
2:3</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And thinkest thou this, O man, that
judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape
the judgment of God?<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">St. Paul is
telling us that those who judge “such things” in others but do “such things”
will not escape the wrath of God. The question here is what are these “such
things?” One need only look at the end of <span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%201&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
1</span></a> </span>to see that a litany of <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20john%205:16-17&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">mortal sins</span></a> are mentioned: fornication,
covetousness, wickedness, etc. Here St. Paul is stating that those who do such
things will not enter heaven and, in a couple of verses later we read the
following,<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202:5-6&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
2:5-6</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up
unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous
judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds:</i></span><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Taken in context,
the very beginning of Romans 2 is EXPLICITLY stating that those who DO evil
will not enter heaven as well as the bona fide fact that God WILL JUDGE
EVERYONE ACCORDING TO THEIR WORKS! In the following verse we read,<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202:7&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
2:7</span></a></span></b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"> <b>states:<o:p></o:p></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">To them who by patient continuance in well
doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So, right after
St. Paul says that God will judge us based on out work, he states that only
those who continue DOING GOOD by striving and working towards holiness will
inherit eternal life! NEVER ONCE, does
St. Paul state that faith alone in Christ is what will give you salvation, and,
in the next verse, Paul says that it is obedience that will give the true
believer a place in heaven,<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202:8-10&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
2:8-10</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>But unto
them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness,
indignation and wrath, </i><span class="text"><i>Tribulation
and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also
of the Gentile; But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good,
to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:</i></span><o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><br /></i></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">How much more
clearer does Paul have to be? St. Paul makes it totally clear that eternal life
IS NOT given by faith alone but for those who do good. Why does St. Paul, right
from the opening of this epistle makes
it known to his readers/listeners that doing good AS WELL AS having faith in
Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation? Simply put, St. Paul is setting the
stage against anyone who would attempt to mangle his words in the rest of the
epistle to their own advantage…kind of like how Protestants do. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%205:5&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
5:5</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And hope maketh not ashamed; because the
love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto
us.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">While this verse by itself does not address
anything directly, it is worth mentioning that this verse contains the Catholic
view of how justification works. For all of historical Christianity up until
the Protestant Reformation, justification was always taught to have been an
interior change that occurs in the individual once they are made just before
God, that is, the individual is infused with grace and made just. This is the
Catholic view on how justification works and this verse is proof that it is the
Holy Spirit which enters our hearts and changes us and justifies us. By contrast, Protestants
say that justification is imputed, that is, justification is legalistically
given by God to a believer based on faith alone…which we have already proven
that the bible itself NEVER backs up. For this reason, we can fundamentally state that the Protestant view of imputation has no biblical standing.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%206:12-23&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
6:12-23</span></a> states in part:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal
body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof… For the wages of sin is
death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">These verse could
only make any sense if someone can lose their salvation/justification by
committing <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20john%205:16-17&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">mortal sins</span></a>, if not, why would St. Paul bother to tell us this? This
verse cannot make any sense within the Protestant theology of <i>sola fide</i>.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208:12-13&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
8:12-13</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>Therefore,
brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye
live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the
deeds of the body, ye shall live.</i></span><i><o:p></o:p></i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><br /></i></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">St. Paul is
stating here that if true believers “live after the flesh,” that is worldly
things and not things of the spirit, they are doomed to die. We know that St.
Paul is speaking to true believers because he addresses them as “brethren.”
Therefore, according to St. Paul, true believers can lose their salvation even
though they have faith in Christ by living for worldly things. This verse too
cannot make any sense in the Protestant view of faith alone justification nor
to the Protestant notion of “once saved, always saved.”<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="color: red;">!</span><span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2010:9-10&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
10:9-10</span></a></span> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus,
and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou
shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with
the mouth confession is made unto salvation.</i></span><b><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is a
favorite passage that many Protestants like to quote for it shows that all one
has to do to attain salvation is to simply confess that Jesus is the Lord. OH, IF IT WERE ONLY SO SIMPLE! The issue here is that most Protestants fail to
recognize why St. Paul said this, indeed, even if one rejected sola fide
justification and accepted the Catholic view, these two verses seem to strike
at the very heart of the Catholic Church’s stance on justification. The issue
here is that we need to understand 2 things: 1) St. Paul was a Roman Jew who
was well versed in the Old Testament and, 2) St. Paul was well aware of
Deuteronomy 30 when he penned Romans 10:9-10. If we look at Deuteronomy
30:14-20, we notice that there are close similarities to Romans 10:9-10,<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2030:14-20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Deuteronomy
30:14-20</span></a> states in part:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in
thy heart, that thou mayest do it…In that I command thee this day to love the</i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i> </i></span><span class="small-caps"><i><span style="font-variant: small-caps;">Lord </span></i></span><span class="text"><i>thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his
commandments and his statutes and his judgments, that thou mayest live and
multiply</i></span><i>…<span class="text">But if thine heart turn away, so that
thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve
them; I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye
shall not prolong your days upon the land…I call heaven and earth to record
this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and
cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: That thou
mayest love the</span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="small-caps"><span style="font-variant: small-caps;">Lord</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="text">thy God, and that
thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him…</span></i><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Romans 10:9-10 is
actually quoting from this passage, notice at how Deuteronomy 30:14-20 speak of
DOING the word of God and of KEEPING the commandments. This reference by St.
Paul is showing that, to him and his listeners, it was understood that to believe "unto salvation” naturally meant that one must follow and keep and do the works
that are necessary for salvation.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2011:20-22&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
11:20-22</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou
standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:</i></span><i> <span class="text">For
if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.</span>
<span class="text"><b><sup> </sup></b>Behold therefore the goodness and
severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if
thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.</span><b><span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Again, how clear
does it have to be? St. Paul starts off by saying that the believing Jews were
cut off from God and then he states that believing Christians will also be cut
off unless, they “continue in his goodness.” <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2013:11&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans 13:11</span></a> states:</b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.</i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><br /></i></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">St. Paul states here that salvation is now closer than when they first started to believe. How can this be? If faith alone saves from the moment one believes, than how is it possible that salvation has gotten nearer now then in the beginning when one first started to believe? The fact is that this verse only makes sense if we see it through the Catholic lens of justification; only in stating that works and the actions done in faithfulness, which get us closer to God, can reconcile this verse. </span><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">INTRO TO 1<sup>ST</sup> CORINTHIANS:<o:p></o:p></span></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In First Corinthians,
Paul is speaking to those in the church at Corinth. He speaks of the problems
that befall <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%205:12&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">those
inside of the church and not to those outside of the Church</span></a>, that is, St.
Paul speaks specifically to believers and not to some group of non-Christians!
With that being said, there are a handful of passages that totally decimate the
Protestant views on sola fide and eternal salvation.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%206:9&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1
Corinthians 6:9</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not
inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor
idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with
mankind,<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If we are saved
by faith alone and, faith alone gives us the inheritance of the kingdom of God,
then why did St. Paul tell the believers at Corinth, whom according to
Protestants are already saved, not to be deceived and not to commit various
sins? The only way that this makes sense is if the 1<sup>st</sup> century
believers at Corinth WERE NOT SAVED even though they had faith in Christ. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%207:8-9&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1
Corinthians 7:8-9</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, it is good for
them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for
it is better to marry than to burn.</i></span><b><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Chapter 7 of 1st Corinthians, deal exclusively
with St. Paul telling us just how much better virginity and purity are to
marriage – not that the marital state is bad but, that the virginal state is
better. It is within that context that we read verse 8-9 and, we must
remember who his audience is: St. Paul is talking to believers and he tells
them that, it is better to marry than to burn, that is, it is better to get
married for those who have not been given the gift of celibacy (see <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%207:7&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">verse
7</span></a>) then to remain outside of marriage and commit fornication and go to
hell. If St. Paul is talking to believers and they are already saved by "<i>faith alone</i>," how could they possibly
burn? Furthermore, if man is saved by <i>faith
alone</i>, how could one burn based on the basis of whether or not they get
married? I have actually posed this question to a couple of <i>sola fide</i> Protestants and I have yet to
get a logical and proof worthy response. Both Protestant concepts of Eternal
Security and Sola Fide are shown here to be absolutely foreign to the true
Gospel.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%209&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1
Corinthians 9:27</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">But I keep under my body, and bring it
into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I
myself should be a castaway.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Without a doubt,
this is one of the most powerful verses that can be used against both <i>sola fide</i>
justification and the belief in Eternal Salvation! Here we see clearly that St.
Paul, the greatest missionary in history and a true Christian, says that he
himself could become a castaway! There is no doubt that in this verse that St. Paul
is completely refuting the Protestant view on justification, if St. Paul
himself knew that his faith didn’t save him nor was he assured of his eternal
salvation, how can a modern day Protestant claim otherwise?<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2013:2&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1
Corinthians 13:2</span></a> states in part:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">…and though I have all faith, so that I
could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If <i>faith <u>alone</u></i>
gives you salvation, why did St. Paul state that without charity, he has
noting?<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%205:1-11&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts
5:1-11</span></a> states in part:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife,
sold a possession, And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy
to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet. But Peter
said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and
to keep back part of the price of the land?…why hast thou conceived this thing
in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. And Ananias hearing
these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them
that heard these things…</i><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><br /></i></span></span></div>
<div class="chapter-1" style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here we see that two believers, a husband and a wife named Ananias
and Sapphira, committed fraud against the early church by keeping some of the
money that they promised to give to the church. As such in the first half of
this passage, the husband is accused by St. Peter of lying and promptly drops
dead, the same fate befalls his wife later in the passage. How is it
that these early believers in Christ, who were willing to give up land for the early church, not saved because of their faith? If Protestants are correct, then they
must’ve gone to heaven as soon as they were struck dead for lying to God,
right? Well, if that’s the case, then why is it that “great fear came” overcame
the believers in the early church after the Ananias and Sapphira incident? </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Why
did these early believers who had faith in Christ get so scared? Simple...because the early Christians, just like the true Catholic Christians of today,
HAD NEVER HEARD OF THE PROTESTANT INVENTION OF <i>SOLA FIDE</i>! The early believers knew that faith by itself meant nothing without works, that is why we see in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%202:42-47&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts 2:42-47</span></a> that the early believers DID WORKS as well as believe.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="chapter-1" style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="chapter-1" style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%208:9-22&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts
8:9-22 states</span></a> in part:</b><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>But there
was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used
sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some
great one: To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying,
This man is the great power of God. And to him they had regard, because that of
long time he had bewitched them with sorceries. But when they believed Philip
preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus
Christ, they were baptized, both men and women…Now when the apostles which were
at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto
them Peter and John…Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the
Holy Ghost.</i></span><i> <span class="text">And when
Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was
given, he offered them money, Saying, Give me also this power, that on
whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said unto him,
Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may
be purchased with money…</span><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><span class="text"><br /></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here we have
Simon Magus, the first heretic mentioned in the New Testament. Notice though
that Simon came to believe in Christ through the preaching of Philip and was
baptized, in other words, he was a believer. But then see how he loses his
faith when he wishes to have the power of the imposition of hands. St. Peter rightly
tells him that he should repent lest he die. If all that is needed is faith
alone, which will justify and save according to Protestant theology, why
did St. Peter tell Simon Magus that – even though he had faith – his ambitions
would perish with him? Why did St. Peter say this? Because St. Peter had NEVER
heard of the Protestant invention of <i>sola fide</i> nor of "eternal salvation" that 16<sup>th</sup>
century heretic men made up in order to form their own personal church and have Christ their way.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="color: red;">!</span><span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2010:43&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts
10:41</span></a></span> states: <o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">To him give all the prophets witness, that
through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Another favorite
Protestant passage that is used to show that belief in Christ, faith alone in
Christ, is sufficient for the remission of sins. This verse is used often times
to demonstrate to Catholics that confessing your sins to a priest is not
necessary. However, what the Protestant who quotes this won’t tell you is that
just 6 versed before in verse 35 we read the following:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2010:35&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts
10:35</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">But in every nation he that feareth him,
and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So, in context,
this clearly shows that it is not enough to believe but that those who work in
righteousness AND believe will be saved. The next time a Protestant quotes Acts
10:41, make sure and to ask them if they believe that good works are a part of
salvation, when they say no, ask them to look at Acts 10:35 and show them just
how wrong they are in regards to good works and salvation!<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2014:21-22&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts
14:21-22</span></a> states in part:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>And when they had preached the gospel to that
city…Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in
the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of
God.</i></span><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">How one handles
tribulation determines whether or not one enters the Kingdom, it is not determined not by faith alone. This passage also mentions that one must continue in the faith, why? Because one can lose their faith and, in doing so, lose their justification and salvation.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%204:17-18%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1
Peter 4:17-18</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house
of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey
not the gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the
ungodly and the sinner appear?</i></span><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">St. Peter states
here that the “righteous [are] scarcely saved,” this puts a whole kink in the
sola fide armor for two reasons: 1) it demonstrates that the righteous man can
fall out of justification and not be saved and 2) if a righteous man is
scarcely or rarely saved, this means that a righteous man must strive and make
a great effort for his salvation beyond
the mere fact that he has faith.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Peter%202:20-21%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2
Peter 2:20-21</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world
through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again
entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the
beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of
righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy
commandment delivered unto them.</i><b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><br /></i></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Clearly, this passage shows that true believers
who “<span class="text"><i>have known the way of
righteousness</i></span><span class="text">” and “<i>have escaped the
pollutions of the world,</i>”</span> and thus being justified, can lose their
salvation by sinning - which has always been the Catholic position on
justification. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%202:7%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Revelation
2:7</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>He that
hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that
overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the
paradise of God.</i><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Notice that it is only those who overcome who will get into
heaven, not the ones who have faith alone. What you do has a part in your
salvation<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%202:23-26&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Revelation
2:23-26</span></a> states in part:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>…and all the
churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I
will give unto every one of you according to your works…But that which ye have
already hold fast till I come.</i></span><i> <span class="text">And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him
will I give power over the nations:</span></i><b><o:p></o:p></b></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><span class="text"><br /></span></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This verse speaks for itself. CHRIST WILL JUDGE US BASED ON OUR
WORKS.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%203:11-12&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Revelation
3:11-12</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>Behold, I
come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown. Him
that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go
no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the
city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my
God: and I will write upon him my new name.</i></span><i><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><br /></i></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here too we see that Christ will reward those who overcome
difficulty and not just those who have believe in <i>faith alone</i> (See also <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%207:14&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Revelation
7:14</span></a>)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2020:12-13%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Revelation
20:12-13</span></a> states: <o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>And I saw
the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and
another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged
out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up
the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their
works.</i></span><i><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><br /></i></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In the final judgment, we see that the dead will be judged
“according to their works.” This passage refutes any Protestant who says that
works are not necessary for salvation<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2022:12&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Revelation
22:12</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And,
behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according
as his work shall be.</span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Christ here again says that when He comes, He
will give His rewards to men according to their works and not whether or not
they have faith in Him!</span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">A final word: I would like to thank all of you who have not only visited my blog over the last week but have also emailed me with their kind and supportive words! As Catholics, we are beholden to not only history, for we are the ONLY Christian Church that can trace it's roots directly to Christ but, to the teaching of the Magisterium as well. We are fortunate to have both of these characteristics for in them we can see the real meaning of what God expects and wants from us. Many thanks to the Fathers of Trent for demonstrating the wholesale error of Protestantism and for staying faithful to Christ's One True Church! </span></div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-86523578148745434022013-12-06T12:45:00.000-05:002013-12-12T16:42:53.387-05:00Justification by Faith Alone? A look at Scripture and how the Catholic view of Justification is proven. Part 3<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In this
third post on the biblical proofs for the Catholic view on justification, we
will look at John’s Gospel and how the evangelist demonstrates that the
Protestant fabrication of <i>sola fide</i><span style="font-size: small;">,
as a general rule for all Christians, goes against the very essence of the true
Gospel of Christ. <o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As always,
<u>all Scripture passages are taken from the King James Version (KJV)</u>.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Due to the
thickly rich theological nature of the Gospel of John, the first several
passages that will be examined are favored Protestant verses that, by
themselves, give credence to the misguided idea that simply by believing in
Jesus, you can attain salvation. As I will show, when we look at these “stand
alone verses” within their proper context, the idea that a person is saved or
justified by faith alone terminates.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john+3:16"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John 3:16</span></a>
states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For God
so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever
believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is one of the most quoted bible verses in all of
Scripture and it is one that most Protestants use in order to validate the fact
that only faith in Jesus Christ is what saves us. But, what most Protestants
don’t mention or, they fail to see, is that in the verses immediately following
John 3:16 we read the following in verses 19 and 20:</span></span><br />
<i style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></i>
<i style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">…</i><span class="text" style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i> And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world,
and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.</i></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> </span><i style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For every
one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his
deeds should be reproved.</i><br />
<i style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Note how in the very context right after John 3:16 we see
references to condemnation for EVIL DEEDS, to people who DO EVIL as well as
DEEDS BEING JUDGED! This makes it totally clear that any faith in God’s
only-begotten Son which will grant salvation, has to be a faith that involves
doing GOOD DEEDS and doing GOOD WORKS. In other words, for us to believe in
Jesus “unto salvation” we must not only have faith in Him but we must also have
the accompanying works which will be judged.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%205:24&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John
5:24</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Verily,
verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent
me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed
from death unto life.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This too is
a favorite verse that sola fide Protestants like to use in order to legitimize
their heresy but, just like John 3:16, if we continue to read a couple of
verses down, we find that here too, works are needed in order to have the
proper faith in Christ:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%205:28-29&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John
5:28-29</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><i><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Marvel not at this: for
the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his
voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of
life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Proof positive that the faith that is talked about in John
5:24 will be judged not on merit of faith alone but, on what those who proclaim
such a faith HAVE DONE!<o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%206:47&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John
6:47</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">Verily,
verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.</span></i><b><i><span style="line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If we were
to take solely this one verse and present it as proof in sola fide, we would
have to negate the entirety of the sixth chapter of John, for in it, John
EXPLICITLY states that we HAVE TO eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ
as we read in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%206:50-51;53-54;56-57&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">verses
50-51, 53-54 and, 56-57</span></a>. Clearly, when read in context, <i>faith alone</i> in never even remotely
stipulated in John’s sixth chapter due to the fact that Christ is commanding us
to DO something, that being, to partake in His flesh and in His blood, i.e.,
the Eucharist.</span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%203:3&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John
3:3</span></a> </span>states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">Jesus
answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be
born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.</span></i><i><span style="line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This is a
heavily favored quote that many Protestant use, for the concept of being “born
again” is a very popular concept among our separated brothers and
sisters-in-Christ. Protestants believe that one is “born again” once they
accept Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. But, IN CONTEXT, we see
that this is not the case. If we continue reading:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%203:3-5&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John
3:3-5</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">Jesus answered and said
unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he
cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born
when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be
born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of
water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.</span></i></span><i><span style="line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here we see
that, when taken in its entirety, the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus
isn’t stating that we go to heaven based on the acceptance, belief or faith
that we have in Christ but, according to Christ Himself, it is based on the
fact of being “born again” through water and the Spirit, that is, salvation
lies in the action – or work – of being baptized! And, in case you missed it, John reiterates
the fact that water baptism is needed in order to be saved; near the end of the
chapter we read in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%203:22-23&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">verses
22 and 23</span></a> that Jesus along with his cousin (who was a baptizer) stayed near
a source of water precisely so they could baptize. <i>Sola fide</i>? Nope. <i>Fide</i> + <i>Baptismus</i>? Yes. (See also <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2028&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
28:19</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2016:16&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Mark
16:16</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%206:3-4&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans
6:3-4</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2012:13&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1
Corinthians 12:13</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%203:27-29&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Galatians
3:27-29</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians%204:5&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Ephesians
4:5</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%202:38-47&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts
2:38-47</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%203:20-21&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1
Peter 3:20-21</span></a>)<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkS0-Mc0K99713XJwZTOQMK7RMgUBE0aJLoD9AKFmFhPkdETWqLAwdqfwkzN3uq3cRuYPbWF26cSABk5q0AR4zFbl4VytGp6NwaH09FupDBvr56vO2QXTs_Xd1Zhxpav0CChKJak6Sp0U/s1600/20494284.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkS0-Mc0K99713XJwZTOQMK7RMgUBE0aJLoD9AKFmFhPkdETWqLAwdqfwkzN3uq3cRuYPbWF26cSABk5q0AR4zFbl4VytGp6NwaH09FupDBvr56vO2QXTs_Xd1Zhxpav0CChKJak6Sp0U/s320/20494284.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Sorry Angry School Boy, but, when you do grow up and<br />
become a Roman Catholic, you'll see just how wrong you are.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%208:12%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John
8:12</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Then
spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that
followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Notice that one MUST follow Jesus in order to have eternal
life, not just faith.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%208:51&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John
8:51</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><i><sup><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"> </span></sup></i></b><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man
keep my saying, he shall never see death.</span></i><i><span style="line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Those who
keep His word, not just believe, will never see death.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2016:27%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John
16:27</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For the
Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I
came out from God.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">The Father loves them because they love Him? Well according
to John chapter 14 we read the following:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2014:15-16%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John
14:15-16</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">If ye love me, keep my
commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another
Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;</span></i></span><b><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In other words, The Father loves those who love Him. But, the
only way to love Him is to KEEP His commandments. Faith alone in is not enough,
we must actively keep the commandments and believe in order to be saved. We
also see this in John’s 15<sup>th</sup> chapter, when he says:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2015:10&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John
15:10</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">If ye
keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my
Father's commandments, and abide in his love.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Again, keeping and holding on to the commandments of Christ
IN CONJUNCTION WITH faith is how we truly love God and Jesus and not by </span><i>faith alone</i>. </span><span style="font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg11yL6TRbLfpLfy4nOB_AYNsYxYHJgffcv3gqmO3SV-YZo3ZscHXfwFoQmxpHghK1HtixB-xaplWA4rVgX6MAmYrpfzxsnVs4eCATaxdL5FguiaBQ1BAICEH6vR7_Ivr26aKQ6QWaVeDQ/s1600/download-3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg11yL6TRbLfpLfy4nOB_AYNsYxYHJgffcv3gqmO3SV-YZo3ZscHXfwFoQmxpHghK1HtixB-xaplWA4rVgX6MAmYrpfzxsnVs4eCATaxdL5FguiaBQ1BAICEH6vR7_Ivr26aKQ6QWaVeDQ/s1600/download-3.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Things Jesus never said but Protestants believe</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-91967128171315083742013-12-05T14:10:00.001-05:002013-12-12T16:43:52.316-05:00Justification by Faith Alone? A look at Scripture and how the Catholic view of Justification is proven. Part 2<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In continuation
for our most wonderful 450<sup>th</sup> anniversary since the close of the 2
decade long Council of Trent, we continue in this post with further proofs that
establish the Catholic view of justification by looking at the New Testament
Scripture passages. Today, we will be looking at the Gospels of Mark and Luke
collectively and see just how anti-biblical the Protestant concept of <i>sola fide</i> or <i>faith alone</i> is in light of some simple exegetical analysis.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As stated in
the <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2013/12/justification-by-faith-alone-look-at.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">last post</span></a>, ALL bible passages are taken from the King James Version (KJV),
lest any Protestant think otherwise.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+3%3A35&version=NASB"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Mark
3:35</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">For
whoever<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span>does the will of God, he is My brother and sister
and mother.”</i><i><span style="line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">To be part
of God’s family and be saved, one must DO the will of God and not just simply
believe.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2013:13&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Mark
13:13</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">And ye
shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that shall endure unto the
end, the same shall be saved.</span><o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Wait a minute! According to <i>sola fide</i>, by simply believing you are saved! It would seem that
our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ would beg to differ as he plainly states that
those who endure to the end – through tribulation, temptation, sin,
persecution, etc - will be saved. This indeed proves that works are necessary
because in order to deny ourselves of sin and temptation, we must actively do
what is right and refrain from doing what is wrong. And, when we are placed in
persecution because of our faith it is up to us to stand up for and proclaim
the truth of Christ with our though, action and words. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2013:35-37&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Mark
13:35-37</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">Watch ye therefore: for
ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at
the cockcrowing, or in the morning:</span></i></span><i><span style="line-height: 115%;"> <span class="text">Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping.</span></span>
<span class="text">And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.</span><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In continuation with the previous cited passage of Mark 13
from above, we see here that Jesus is instructing all to keep watch for the
coming of the Son of Man, meaning that we are to be prepared for when He
returns lest he finds us “asleep” in our faith. Why would Jesus even states
this if all we need is to have faith in Him alone to be saved when He returns? According
to Protestant theology, if faith alone saves you then how is it that we are
supposed to “keep watch” and “be ready” if we are already saved? Indeed, why
even be observant, vigilant and prepared for His Second Coming if your faith is
sufficient in and of itself to save you? If all you need is faith and faith
alone, then this passage, spoken by Christ Himself, makes no sense. The Gospel
of Luke has this same parable and, in the Lucan version, the emphasis on works and
doing things for salvation is even more prevailing:<o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2012:38-43&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
12:38-43</span></a> states in part:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">And if
he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them
so, blessed are those servants…Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man
cometh at an hour when ye think not…Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when
he cometh shall find so doing.</span><b><o:p></o:p></b></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Interesting,
how in this parable Jesus states that the faithful servant is not the one who
has faith in his lord but the one who actually holds on to his faith AND DOES
what his lord commands him to do! Another very similar instance happens again in
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2021&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
Chapter 21</span></a>:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2021:34-36&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
21:34-36</span></a> </span>states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">And take heed to
yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and
drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares.</span></i></span><i><span style="line-height: 115%;"> <span class="text">For as a snare shall it come on all them
that dwell on the face of the whole earth.</span></span> <span class="text">Watch
ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all
these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.</span><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">How truly
interesting! In this passage we see that a failure to do things, that is, a
failure to avoid sins, can cost one their salvation! This demonstrates just how
foreign the Protestant belief in <i>faith
alone</i> is to the true Gospel.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBVqFFB10fCeqNvuG5NY47_uFHuFBq9fOygMTnzClJcZxOTub4Xp4-ytJOOw2C2wXShSI8i3S2jw8QC5ESTJIf0QgQiZjUEjXfs2gyN-hYYBD1PLNppvtuozHtWgnmuz6u5Lqhe769imA/s1600/35hort.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBVqFFB10fCeqNvuG5NY47_uFHuFBq9fOygMTnzClJcZxOTub4Xp4-ytJOOw2C2wXShSI8i3S2jw8QC5ESTJIf0QgQiZjUEjXfs2gyN-hYYBD1PLNppvtuozHtWgnmuz6u5Lqhe769imA/s320/35hort.jpg" width="271" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Unfortunately, way too many Christians actually believe this.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=?Luke+4:1-2"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke 4:1-2</span></a>
states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">And Jesus being full of
the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the
wilderness,</span> being forty days tempted of the devil. And in those days he
did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered.</i></span><span style="line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What does
this passage have to do with <i>sola fide</i>?
Well, simply put, here we see that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was tempted by
the devil. This is meant to show us as Christians that, if the devil will tempt
the second person of the Holy Trinity, how much more easier is it for the devil
to tempt us? Jesus here proves that he is much stronger than the devil and
would not give Himself over to him. How many of us, on the other hand, do give
into temptation? This concept of giving one’s self to temptation would have NO
MEANING at all if all we need for salvation is “<i>faith alone</i>.” Think about it: if all you need is “<i>faith alone</i>” to be saved, why would the
devil even tempt us if we believe in Jesus? After all, wouldn’t we technically already
be saved? This passage has absolutely NO MEANING and NO APPLICATION if <i>sola fide</i> is in fact a part of the
Christian faith! <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%209:24&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
9:24</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">For
whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but whosoever will lose his life
for my sake, the same shall save it.</span></i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Again we see here that what one DOES, in giving up sinful and
worldly things, has a direct effect on whether or not one attains salvation.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%209:62&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
9:62</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">And
Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking
back, is fit for the kingdom of God.</span><o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This passage shows that one who is justified can “look back,”
and turn away from God and lose his salvation. Here, we see that attaining
salvation is an ongoing effort, an ongoing work which one obtains by “plowing”
through temptations and obstacles. Interestingly enough, this is Jesus’
response to a man who simply paid lip service to Him, one verse before in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%209:61&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">verse
61</span></a>. The man tells Jesus that he too, much like the man in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%209:59&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">verse
59</span></a>, is willing to follow Jesus as his Master, it is obvious that he has
faith in Jesus BUT, before being able to follow Christ, he states that there’s
one caveat: Jesus MUST let him go and bid farewell to his family. Here Christ
is making it crystal clear that you have to do what the Master says and not
find reasons not to do what is expected of you, lest you turn back after having
“plowed” through all the sin and lose your salvation. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2010:25-28%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
10:25-28</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">And, behold, a certain
lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit
eternal life?</span> He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest
thou?</i></span><i> And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all
thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy
mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast
answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.</i><span style="line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Notice that
Jesus is asked what one MUST DO to be saved. He tells the lawyer that he MUST
DO these things to be saved. It simply isn’t enough to believe and have faith
alone. If the Protestant invention of <i>sola
fide</i> were true, this would have been perfect opportunity for Jesus to
expose it and yet, He didn’t.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2014:27-33&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
14:27-33</span></a> states in part:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">And
whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple… So
likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot
be my disciple.</span><o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This shows us that salvation in NOT attained by <i>faith alone</i> but by faith AND the
carrying of one’s cross AND making sure that possessions are not more important
than Christ. The work done here is straightforward: make sure you bear your
cross and make sure you prioritize your life so that the things you have do not
come before God.</span><span style="font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0PRgXR9KEtgxT3joiXj3MoN6gT42VSOef06LJHliTf7eEQugpoNoHi6C2Ua37hHSHrq8zZeJnr8Fl0DxQPx1IliFSFZ8APHQB7olY6egnQj5pm6-0Q4GlHJCE9rroJrkPBfpaavGubjk/s1600/2472a92ec9bd5af6622d8c3a9ae91fd48bf81329cead5a2661ab9b0767f2edaa.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0PRgXR9KEtgxT3joiXj3MoN6gT42VSOef06LJHliTf7eEQugpoNoHi6C2Ua37hHSHrq8zZeJnr8Fl0DxQPx1IliFSFZ8APHQB7olY6egnQj5pm6-0Q4GlHJCE9rroJrkPBfpaavGubjk/s320/2472a92ec9bd5af6622d8c3a9ae91fd48bf81329cead5a2661ab9b0767f2edaa.jpg" width="224" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Yup, and neither did any of the writers of the New Testament,<br />
Early Church Fathers, Jesus or any Christian for the first<br />
1,500 years of Christianity. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-59411544643276544292013-12-04T14:17:00.000-05:002013-12-04T14:17:29.932-05:00Justification by Faith Alone? A look at Scripture and how the Catholic view of Justification is proven. Part 1<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As the
Protestant Reformation grew, so did the protestant heretical notion of <i>sola fide</i>, that is, by <i>faith alone</i>. Today many
protestants believe that just simple faith can save them and, if a protestant
has any Calvanistic leanings, they go so far as to say that your faith is Jesus is
enough to guarantee your eternal salvation – a doctrine that no church father
ever stated nor is this a concept that was seen in the first 1500 years of Christianity. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Therefore <b>in honor of the 450<sup>th</sup> anniversary of the Council of Trent</b>, which
laid out what actually justifies us before God, I will endeavor to use
Scripture in order to prove this point and firmly establish the Catholic point
and demonstrate how the protestant invention of “faith alone” goes against the
Bible itself. Indeed I will show that works and things you do are integral to
the economy of salvation. This will be a 4 part series of posts over the next 4
days, starting off with the first 4 Gospels and then the New Testament works.
This first post will deal with the Gospel of Matthew, tomorrow’s post will dive
into Mark and Luke, Friday’s post will be John, and Monday’s post will be on
the New Testament writers.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So, with
that being said, let’s see if Jesus and the New Testament writers teach the
Catholic point of view on justification or the protestant one. <u>NOTE: all
Scripture passages are taken from the King James Version (KJV) and be <b>bold</b>, the scripture passage itself will
be <i>italicized</i> and the explanation
will be in normal font.<o:p></o:p></u></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5:29-30"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
5:29-30</span></a> states</span></b><span style="line-height: 115%;">:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="woj"><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">If your
right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><span class="woj"><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">it </span></i></span><span class="woj"><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members
perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.</span></i></span><span class="text"></span><b><i><sup><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span id="en-NKJV-23265"> </span></span></sup></i></b><span class="woj"><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">And if your right hand causes
you to sin, cut it off and cast it</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><span class="woj"><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">from you; for it is more
profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to
be cast into hell.</span></i></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This parable,
which is addressing sin, states that we must “cut off” those things that lead
us into offenses against God. However, this parable only has meaning if we
understand that sins and works are a part of salvation; we must deprive
ourselves of things, that is we must consciously avoid sin, in order to save
our soul. If man were justified by <i>faith
alone</i>, then this parable would have no meaning. (See also <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%209:42-48&version=NKJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Mark
9: 42-48</span></a>)<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+6%3A14&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
6:14</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For if
ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:</span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Notice that
man is forgiven ONLY if he does the action of forgiveness and not by <i>faith alone</i>. Hence, <i>faith alone</i> is not sufficient for the forgiveness of sins.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%207:21-23%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
7:21-23</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Not everyone
that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he
that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me
in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name
have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?</span></i></span><i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> <span class="text">And then will I profess unto them, I never knew
you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.</span></span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here we see
that he who DOES the will of God will enter heaven, NOT those who simply
believe in Him, in other words, Christ emphasizes the fact that YOU MUST DO
what He says to be His.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%207:24-27&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
7:24-27</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>Therefore
whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto
a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:</i></span><i> <span class="text"><b><sup> </sup></b>And the rain descended,
and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell
not: for it was founded upon a rock.</span> <span class="text">And every
one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened
unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:</span> <span class="text">And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and
beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.</span></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Clearly, here again, Christ tells us that we must not only hear
his words but DO THEM.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2010:22&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
10:22</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And ye
shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end
shall be saved.</span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Why do we have to “endure to the end” to be
saved? Why didn’t Christ state that all we need to be saved is <i>faith alone</i>? This verse totally
contradicts the Protestant notion that faith, in and of itself, saves. Christ
could not have been more clearer, YOU MUST be faithful until the end, if not,
you will not be justified before God, therefore, just because you believe now
doesn’t mean that you will be saved later on.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2012:36-37&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
12:36-37</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i>But I say
unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account
thereof in the day of judgment.</i><b><sup> </sup></b><i>For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by
thy words thou shalt be condemned.</i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">This verse proves <i>faith
alone</i> is not part of justification, if it were, why is that the words that
men speak shall be taken into account on the day of judgement? If <i>faith alone</i> already saves you, why does
Christ state that your words can condemn you? Additionaly, Christ states
EXPLICITLY that your words – an action, that you do - will justify you. This
verse totally refutes the view of justification by faith alone. (See also <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+19%3A22&version=ESV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
19:22</span></a>)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2013:18-21&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
13:18-21</span></a></b> states:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>Hear ye
therefore the parable of the sower.</i></span><i> <span class="text">When any one heareth the word of the kingdom,
and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that
which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.</span>
<span class="text">But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is
he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it;</span> <span class="text">Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when
tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended.</span></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here we see that a man can believe for a while and yet fall away.
This parable, The Parable of the Sower, is found in the other 2 synoptic
Gospels and they both state even more clearly that even though you once had
faith you can lose it and therefore lose your salvation, as noted in the Gospel
of Mark and in the Gospel of Luke, let's briefly look at these.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><b><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%204:16-17%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Mark
4:16-17</span></a> states</b>:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>And these
are they likewise which are sown on stony ground; who, when they have heard the
word, immediately receive it with gladness;</i></span><i> <span class="text">And have no root in themselves, and so endure
but for a time: afterward, when affliction or persecution ariseth for the
word's sake, immediately they are offended.</span></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span class="text"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%208:13&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
8:13</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">They on
the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these
have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.</span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Christ refers to people who clearly believed for a time but
eventually fall away and are not saved. If they had faith and, <i>faith alone</i> is what is needed to be
saved, how is it possible that they are now not saved? Some of the more cynical,
<i>sola fide</i> believing Protestants will
state that the people spoken of in these parables never had faith to begin with,
to state this is to put yourselves above Christ Himself! Christ unambiguously
states that THEY HAD FAITH, not that they pretended or feigned faith in Him
but, that THEY HAD FAITH. This proves that <i>faith
alone</i> cannot save you and therefore refutes the false Gospel of Protestantism.
If we continue looking at <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%208&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
chapter 8</span></a>, the evangelist continues to hammer away at the fact that faith
alone does not save,<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%208:15&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
8:15</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">But that
on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard
the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.</span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Notice that it is those who have heard the word and keep the word
and PRACTICE IT, are the ones who will bring fruit to eternal life.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%208:21&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke
8:21</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And he
answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the
word of God, and do it.</span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So, who are the bretheren of Christ? Those who solely have faith
in Him or, those who hear His word and DO IT? Continuing on with Matthew…<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2013:41-42&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
13:41-42</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>The Son of
man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all
things that offend, and them which do iniquity;</i></span><i> <span class="text">And shall cast them into a furnace of fire:
there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.</span></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Notice that it is those who DO iniquity that are condemned to
hell. In other words, God will judge you on your works to see if you’ve done
iniquity against Him. How can this be, if faith alone saves? Again, we see the
concept of <i>sola fide</i> at odds with
Scripture.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2016:27&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
16:27</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">For the
Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he
shall reward every man according to his works.</span></i></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Christ could not have been any more clearer: He will render judgment
upon man based on his works.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<b><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2018:12-14&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
18:12-14</span></a> states, in part:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<i style="background-color: transparent;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">…if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he
not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that
which is gone astray?... Even so it is not the will of your Father which
is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.</span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In this
parable Jesus, in being our Good Shepherd, is calling us his sheep. However, he
is stating that even His sheep, that is, those who believe in Him, can go
astray and get lost. We know that Jesus is specifically talking about those who
believe in Him going astray because in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2018:6&version=KJV">Matthew
8:6</a>, when he is talking about “these little ones” He EXPLICITLY states that
they believe in Him. Again, we see that just because you have faith, you can go
away from Jesus and be lost – not because Christ wills it – but, because you
willfully chose to distance yourself from Him, even though you have faith in
Him.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2019:16-17&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
19:16-17</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">And, behold, one came and
said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal
life?</span></i></span><i><span style="line-height: 115%;"> <span class="text">And he
said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is,
God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.</span></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Christ here
states that salvation is attained by keeping the Commandments, NOT by faith
alone.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2019:23-24%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
19:23-24</span></a> states:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>Then said
Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly
enter into the kingdom of heaven.</i></span><i> <span class="text">And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the
eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.</span><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">What one
does with the funds/treasures that God bestows upon them will affect their
salvation.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2025:15-30&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
25:15-30</span></a> states, in part:<o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="line-height: 115%;"> </span><i><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">And unto
one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one</span>…he that had
received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other
five talents. And likewise he that had received two, he also gained
other two. But he that had received one went and digged in the earth,
and hid his lord's money</i><i><span style="line-height: 115%;">…<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;">And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five
talents… His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant:
thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many
things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord…He also that had received two
talents came and said, Lord</span>… His lord said unto him, Well done, good and
faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee
ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord…</span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;">Then he
which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou
art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou
hast not strawed…His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful
servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have
not strawed…cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall
be weeping and gnashing of teeth.</span><o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Here we see that God demands us TO USE our talents. What is
truly interesting is that the lord in this parable, who represents God, is said
to “reap where he has not sown,” this is an implicit indication that God
expects us to do and to produce our own works done with His Grace, if we do not
cooperate with His Grace to produce such supernatural works, and, are not able
to present such supernatural works before Him at the day of judgment, we will
cast into hell. This parable demolishes justification by faith alone and
distinctly establish the Catholic point that we are justified by faith AND
works.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2025:45-46%20&version=KJV"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
25:45-46</span></a> states: <o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="text"><i>Then shall
he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one
of the least of these, ye did it not to me.</i></span><i> <span class="text">And these shall go away into everlasting
punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.</span><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div style="background: white;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><i><span class="text"><br /></span></i></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="line-height: 115%;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">We see, once
again, that what one does determines whether or not one has salvation.</span><span style="font-size: small;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-80712593820246065892013-10-21T13:26:00.000-04:002014-08-06T11:53:05.027-04:00Protestant scholars still don't get it...we don't idolize nor worship Mary! Part 3<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/xplXGu4w0No?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
This is the last post that will be dedication to this video. Due to the extreme length of the previous post. This post will deal with the comments posed by John MacArthur.<br />
<br />
<b>@ 5:05-5:52 ,</b> <i><b>"One of the other things that is tragic about that view, of praying to the Saints and Mary is that it strikes a blow against the gracious character of God and Christ. The idea of all of that is that God is very tough and He's wrathful and somewhat transcendant rather than eminent...the idea is that you don't want to directly to God...and you don't want to go to Jesus because He can be pretty tough..." </b></i><br />
<i><b><br /></b></i>
MacArthur here states that the reason why Catholics believe in the intercessory prayers of Mary and the Saints is because we don't want to go directly to God because He's so awesome that it terrifies us! What a load. MacArthur is trying, in a sense, to discredit Catholicism by stating that we really don't believe in God because, if we did, we wouldn't run away from Him and towards lesser beings like Mary or the Saints. In reality, this is somewhat of a contradiction when one analyzes MacArthur's supposition due to the fact that, if God does have the ability to use Mary, the angels and the Saints in order to convert us, why wouldn't He?<br />
<br />
Think about that: if God <i>could </i>use them, why wouldn't He use them? We already saw in the <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2013/08/protestant-scholars-still-dont-get-itwe.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">first post</span></a> that God used the ghost of the prophet Samuel to warn Saul about his demise, in Luke's Gospel we see Gabriel's announcement to Mary and, we also made aware that God allowed Moses and Elijah to become present at the Transfiguration in front of 3 Apostles. Therefore, God can and will use all supernatural resources as He sees fit in order for His message to resonate with whomever He so desires.<br />
<br />
What Mr. MacArthur doesn't realize is that, because of Christ, we now have the ability to be connected to Mary, the angels and all of the Saints, that is, it is because of the mediation of Christ that we can have effective intercessory prayers with the saints and Mary. Let's take a look at <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+2%3A5&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Timothy 2:5</span></a>, it states:<br />
<br />
<i>For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus...</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Plainly stated is the fact that Christ is the "middle man" - so to speak - between us and God. Many Protestants take this one verse and use it heavily (and unwittingly) against the historical fact that Christians have been venerating and asking for intercessory prayers since the foundation of Christendom itself! Indeed, if one were to take stock of history, it is virtually impossible to find any Early Church Father, writer or historian not note that this was common practice. Unfortunately this fact escapes Mr. MacArthur due to the fact that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Community_Church_(California)" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">the church which he shepherds</span></a> was founded less than 60 years ago. In as much as his church has only had but 3 pastors during its brief history, far be it from me to assume that he would have any inkling about truthful, historical, written and documented Christianity prior to the invention of his church in the late 1950's, but I digress...<br />
<br />
What many Protestants don't realize, is that the first 4 verses of 1 Timothy 2 not only lend significance to intercessory prayers but demand that they be made by all and for all. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%202:1-4&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Timothy 2:1-4</span></a> reads:<br />
<br />
<i>I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men, for kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quite and peaceful life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.</i><br />
<br />
Notice that, in verse 1, St. Paul says that intercessory prayers among Christians is a pleasing thing to God and later, in verse 5, states that it is because of Christ as our mediator that this is possible. <b>In other words, Jesus being our mediator DOES NOT prevent other people from praying for us.</b> Indeed, the Greek word used in 1 Tim 2:5 for <i>mediator</i> is <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype';"><i>μεσίτης</i></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"> which transliterates to, <i>mesites</i>. <a href="http://biblesuite.com/greek/3316.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">A</span></a></span><a href="http://biblesuite.com/greek/3316.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">ccording to Strong's Concordance</span></a>, t<span style="font-family: inherit;">he term <i>mesites</i> is used by St. Paul to, not only describe Jesus as our New Covenant mediator but, to also describe Moses as the Old Covenant mediator in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%203:19&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Galatians 3:19</span></a>, in which St. Paul states that the Law was entrusted to Moses, who was a mediator, by God's angels. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Hence, before Christ, Moses was a mediator of intercessory prayers between God and the Israelites but now, through Christ, intercessory prayers can be made from one faithful Christian to another and, since death has no hold over our New Covenant mediator, our intercessor prayers can be offered to those who are alive in heaven. <b>In other words, Jesus' mediatorship DOES NOT prevent our fellow brothers and sisters in heaven from praying for us any more than it prevents us as Christians from praying for one another here on earth.</b> </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
But, to the careful reader of Scripture, there is one thing that pops out in verse 5 of 1 Timothy chapter 2 and that is, why does St. Paul stress the humanity of Jesus when he refers to Jesus as "<i>the man Christ Jesus?"</i> Simply put, this places emphasis on the Incarnation and how God fully intended to involve as well as include humanity in Christ's salvific achievement. Therefore, in and through the Incarnation, Christ saves us and we become members of His Body and, if members we be, then by grace we participate in His mediation and redemptive work! <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Peter+2%3A9&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Peter 2:9</span></a> states the following in part:<br />
<br />
<i>But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation...that you may proclaim the praises of Him...</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
By virtue of our baptism, we are made members of the Body of Christ (<a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a1.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">CCC #1267</span></a>) and, as such, we all share in Priesthood of Christ. And, if we are all priests, then we are all - by definition - mediators, for one of the main jobs of a priest is to mediate. It is only under this understanding that the first 5 verses of 1 Timothy 2 can even make any sense: never once does St. Paul tell Timothy that Jesus is the <u>only</u> mediator nor does he mention Christ's mediation alone, on the contrary, he exhorts <u>ALL OF US</u> to pray and intercede for one another! If Christ alone is the exclusive mediator, then there would be no reason for St. Paul to even state that we should do these things in kind to one another since Christ is already doing it for us. The reason why this is important is because, as stated earlier, WE ARE PARTICIPANTS in the Body of Christ and not spectators on the sidelines.<br />
<br />
But, naturally, the Protestant will ask: "where does the Bible state that the spirits in heaven pray or do anything for us or that they participate with us in anything?" Well, in order to answer that, let's look at <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+12%3A1&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews 12:1</span></a>, in which we are explicitly told that souls of the deceased are in fact able to witness what is happening among the living. It states:<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i>Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us...</i></div>
<div>
<i><br /></i></div>
<div>
In order to fully understand what the author of Hebrews is talking about in Hebrews 12:1, we must first look at Hebrews 11. A thorough reading of chapter 11 shows that author goes through a list of Old Testament characters who died in faith awaiting the Messiah. The word <i>witnesses</i> used in Hebrews 12:1 is the Greek word <span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype'; font-size: medium;">μάρτυς</span><span style="font-family: inherit;">, which is translated as <i><a href="http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/martus.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">martus</span></a></i>, or, martyr. </span> Hence, when the author of Hebrews states that we are surrounded by such witnesses, we must take into account the fact that the author had just mentioned a slew of famous individuals from the Hebrew Scriptures in chapter 11; therefore, by the time we get to Hebrews 12:1, it is noting that, much like those who have died before us with faith in God's promises, we too - in being surrounded with them - share in that same faith, that is, we too are awaiting Christ's inevitable return with the hope of our eternal promise. And, since we have that same faith, this "cloud of martyrs"<i> </i>that St. Paul states are around us, bear witness WITH US to our faith in God.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
This point is made even more concrete when we jump to <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+12%3A22-24&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews 12:22-24</span></a>, it reads:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i><span style="color: red;">22 </span>But you are to come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angles, <span style="color: red;">23</span> to the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, <span style="color: red;">24</span> and to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.</i></div>
<div>
<i><br /></i></div>
<div>
Notice how verse 24 states that Jesus is the mediator. Here the author of Hebrews emphasizes this AND, just like in 1 Timothy 2, Jesus as our mediator <u><b>IS NOT</b></u> mentioned in a vacuum. That is, in 1 Timothy 2, St. Paul tells us to give intercessory prayers for everyone because Christ is our mediator and then, in Hebrews 12:22-24, we are told that there are an innumerable company of angels, a general assembly, a church, and, the "spirits of just men made perfect" <u><b>IN CONJUNCTION WITH</b></u> Jesus' mediation. In other words, Jesus' mediation is never mentioned by itself, it is always accompanied by some secondary group of faithful people because, in and of itself, Christ's mediatorship is useless without the faithful asking for supplications and intercessory prayers via Christ Jesus.<br />
<br />
To that end, the souls in Heaven participate with us in our prayers through Christ because of Christ's mediatorship and the unity of the Mystical Body of Christ in heaven, purgatory and on earth, <u>is not </u>bound by death in the same way that death had no power over Jesus Himself! Quite the opposite: through Christ, we become connected with ALL of His faithful, whether it be here on earth or in heaven.</div>
<div>
<br />
<i><b>@5:53-Jesus can't resist His mother and God can't resist Jesus. So that's the chain, you go to Mary because Mary can soften up Jesus and then Jesus can take it up to the Father...this layering that assumes that God's less than gracious, merciful, kind, compassionate and sympathetic to the sinner is a blow to His nature and to the nature of Christ Himself."</b></i><br />
<i><b><br /></b></i>
The issue here is that Mr. MacArthur simply fails to see just who Mary is. Why do the Catholics and the vast majority of Christian history have Mary as a person to whom we can ask for intercessory prayers? Because, as the mother of the King, that is precisely her job.<br />
<br />
While I won't go into a full on discussion about Mary being the Queen of Heaven, due to the fact that I've already gone into great detail on her Queenly status (see <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/p/why-is-mary-queen-of-heaven.html" style="background-color: white;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">here</span></a>), what I will expand upon is the fact that it was the duty of the Queen Mother, that being, the Mother of the King of Israel, to ask her son for petitions on behalf of his subjects. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Kings%202:13-25&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1Kings 2:13-25</span></a>, we see that Bathsheeba petitions her son, King Solomon on behalf of his older brother Adonijah, in verse 20 we read:<br />
<br />
<i>Then she said, "I desire one small petition of you; do not refuse me." And the king said to her, "Ask it, my mother, for I will not refuse you."</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Based on this passage, we have evidence that the King of Israel can't refuse the Queen Mother. However, the well-versed bible-only Protestant will quickly state that in the follow passages, it turns out that Solomon breaks his word and ends up executing Adonijah, therefore, no link can be made here of Queenly intercessory action. What we need to understand is that if we were to project the kingship of Solomon to the Kingship of Jesus and the queenly status of Bathsheeba to that of the Queenly status of Mary, we must immediately note that Solomon and Bathsheeba were both mere humans, prone to fault and to sin, heck, anyone who's read Bathsheeba's history can't deny that she wasn't cunning!<br />
<br />
Whereas these two were fallible creatures, Mary and Jesus were supernaturally special: Mary, was preserved from original sin and Jesus was completely sinless. Hence, the argument can be made that, since both Mary and Jesus were more than just mere fallible creatures, they personified the perfection of their respective roles, that is, Jesus was the perfect son - both earthly and heavenly, and Mary was the perfect mother both when she was on earth and now as she is in heaven. Because of that, Mary in her Queenly status can petition her son on our behalf and Christ, being the perfect King, cannot deny her or change His mind.<br />
<br />
The real issue here is that Protestants like MacArthur and Sproul don' have a grasp on the most important part of saintly intercession: ONLY JESUS CAN ALLOW INTERCESSION, THE SAINTS AND MARY BY THEMSELVES CAN NOT INTERCEDE FOR US ON THEIR OWN VOLITION. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church states in <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p6.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">paragraph #970</span></a> states (<i><b>my emphasis</b></i>):<br />
<br />
<i>"Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But, the Blessed Virgins salutary influence on men...flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, <b>rests on His mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it.</b>"</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>"No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but, just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful and, as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among His creatures, so also the <b>unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in his one source.</b>"</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
In other words, the mediation of Christ is not inhibited or usurped as these two Protestant scholars suggest. Quite the contrary, the simple fact that Christ's mediation allows for intercession by the saints precisely demonstrates His power! Therefore, anyone who states that Catholics believe that Mary or the Saints can help us because we pray to them is not only misrepresenting Catholic teaching and historical Christianity but, they are diminishing the power that Jesus Christ Himself has.</div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-22951415568798515022013-10-01T10:53:00.000-04:002014-08-06T11:52:11.199-04:00Protestant scholars still don't get it...we don't idolize nor worship Mary! Part 2<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/xplXGu4w0No?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
<br />
In this second post, I'll be covering two accusations made by R.C. Sproul that many Protestants make. Mr. Sproul states that there are many Christian faiths that have error in their theology but, it is okay to have such error as long as you stick to the Gospel of Christ as it is found in the Bible. He also states that the Sacrifice of the Mass is the main reason as to why the Catholic Church is an apostate body which cannot be viewed as a true Christian communion. I will therefore prove Sproul wrong on both of these counts by clearly demonstrating that the Catholic Church CANNOT have error in it's theology and I will also show what the Church teaches in regards to the sacrifice that occurs in the Mass as not only being biblical but, it confirms who Christ really is.<br />
<br />
<b>@2:15-2:47 - <i>"I think you can be a Christian and have all kinds of error in your theology...all of us have error mixed in with truth in our faith. Some of this error is extremely dangerous..."</i></b><br />
<br />
This is where Protestantism and Catholicism divide. For what a Protestant can accept in regards to their man-made theology cannot compare to what God has revealed through Christ's one true Church; in other words, while Protestantism is racked with contradictory statements, the Catholic Church can never teach in error for she is preserved from it by God Himself. Sounds like a bold statement, doesn't it? Well, sometimes the truth is a powerful thing indeed!<br />
<br />
How is it that the Catholic Church can claim such a thing, that it is saved from error? Well, the simple fact of the matter is that once we analyze the historical and theological data, one has to rationally arrive to this position. To begin with, Mr. Sproul mentioned that in his church members don't have to affirm the <a href="http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Westminster Confession of Faith</span></a> in order to be part of that church unless you become an officer there. This Protestant document was put forward in 1646 by the Church of England in order to lay out what they officially believed. Anyone who is familiar with the Church of England knows that it was INVENTED by King Henry the VIII due to the fact that he wanted an annulment from his marriage to Catherine of Aragon and, since the Catholic Church would not allow for the annulment without proper cause, the King of England decided that it was much easier to simply start his own personal church in order to have his lawful marriage illicitly dissolved.<br />
<br />
So, right of the bat, Mr. Sproul is stating that a <i>man-made doctrine</i> that he is using in his <i>man-made religious denomination</i> need not be accepted by the people attending his church lest they decided to become officials, at which point, they must acknowledge the<i> man-made doctrine</i> of the Westminster Confession in order to hold an office in<i> </i>that<i> man-made </i>Christian congregation. Gee, with all of these man-made inventions, is it any wonder why Sproul HAS TO CONCEDE to the fact that there are "all kinds of error" in Christian theology? Wouldn't it be nice if there was a Christian denomination that was saved from humanly failures in order to establish the truth of Christ here on Earth? Only in a religious system invented by men can there be such multitudinous errors; the Catholic Church, however, was founded by Christ upon St. Peter and, therefore, no error can exist. But, how can this be? How is it that Catholics can make such a claim and Protestants cannot?<br />
<br />
This is primarily due to the fact that, unlike Protestants, we don't take the Bible as our lone source of authority; we also have Sacred Tradition as well as the teaching authority of the Magisterium. Why is it important that there are 3 bona fide sources of authority? For the exact same reason that there are 3 different branches of government in the U.S., they provide checks and balances. You see, the only way that the Catholic Church can arrive at theological proofs is that it can check to see if all 3 God-inspired sources reconcile with one another and, if they don't, then the Catholic Church cannot proclaim it to be a Christian truth. So, I will, endeavor to demonstrate just how the Catholic Church arrives at these 3 sources of authority so as to prove Mr. Sproul incorrect in stating that "all of us have error in our faith."<br />
<br />
Let's start off with the Magisterium. The term <a href="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/magisterium" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Magisterium</span></a> simply means "office of the teacher" and, the Catholic Church claims that this office was officially put in place by Christ before His Ascension. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+28%3A16-20&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew 28:16-20</span></a> we read the following:<br />
<br />
<i>Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had appointed for them. When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some doubted. And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." </i><br />
<i><br /></i>
So, let's ask ourselves: if we were alive in the year 32 A.D. and had a question about Jesus' teaching, it would've been possible for us to go directly to Jesus and ask Him to answer our query. However, after Jesus Ascended into heaven, if we had a question pertaining to a teaching that Jesus' taught, who then could we go to and ask? Who had the authority to answer such questions in light of the fact that Christ was no longer here on earth? Well, according to Matthew 28, Jesus tells his Apostles that He has all authority on heaven and earth which He bequeaths to them in the same manner as <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+18%3A18&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew 18:18</span></a>. He also tells them that they are to go and convert the whole world by baptizing them and "teaching them to observe" all of the things that He commanded them to do. But, the most important is the very last verse in Matthew 28 because it explicitly states that, since the Apostles now have the authority to teach others, in order for them to teach all of Christ's truths, Jesus - the second Person of the Godhead - promises to be with them forever. In other words, God Himself will be with these new teachers so that they cannot proclaim anything in error! Hence, these first 11 men whom Jesus conferred the authority to teach, make up the very first Magisterium or, the very first office of the teachers.<br />
<br />
And, as the Bible plainly states and history demonstrably proves, the early Church believed in succession and the bestowal of the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands as it is depicted throughout the Old and New Testament. Therefore, it only makes sense that the Magisterium, which Jesus Himself instituted, has also been handed down via succession to the modern day. After all, if the eternal Lord affirmed that he would be with these teachers until the end, then there is NO WAY that an authoritative office of teachers instituted by Christ has ever been disbanded or done away with. Quite the contrary, it continues to this very day in the only Church that has been around since 33 A.D. It therefore follows that, if Christ gave this office His authority and Christ is constantly with this office so that it can teach all that He has commanded, anything that flows from the Magisterium HAS TO BE unerring, infallible and impeccable because Jesus Christ Himself is assuring that any teaching that this office proclaims is, in fact, the Word of God. It therefore follows that the Magisterium is an authoritative source of God's word for Christ Himself protects it from error.<br />
<br />
Secondly, we have Sacred Tradition which are the oral teachings of Jesus Christ that were handed down to the Apostles and to their successors. Protestants like to claim that oral Tradition is unreliable due to the fact that these Traditions were the actions and words of men and not of God inspiring them to do such things; how truly ironic since <u>ALL</u> Protestants denominations are, by definition, man-made! When it comes to Sacred Tradition, we know for a fact that all of the things that Jesus taught were unerringly communicated by the Apostles and to their disciples due to the fact that Christ promised to send the Holy Spirit to them. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+14%3A26&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John 14:26</span></a> Jesus states:<br />
<br />
<i>But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Here we see that Christ has given the Apostles reassurance that the Holy Spirit will open their minds to His teachings and remind them of everything that He taught, therefore, ANYTHING that an Apostle said or taught in regards to the Christian faith could not of been false, because the Holy Spirit wouldn't of allowed for it. Additionally, we also know that there were other things that Christ taught which aren't written about, as <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2021:25&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John 21:25</span></a> mentions:<br />
<br />
<i>And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.</i><br />
<br />
Wouldn't it be nice to know of all of these other things that Jesus taught and did? In order to understand Christ and Christianity better, wouldn't if be a huge benefit if someone would've preached of all of these extra things that Jesus did? Well, if you are a member of the Catholic Church, then congratulations! For you have that oral Tradition still intact that was communicated by the Holy Spirit to the Apostles and later to their disciples. In other words, Sacred Tradition was the early preaching done by the Church Fathers that was preserved from error and therefore, it is God-inspired and hence, the Word of God. But, most importantly, Sacred Tradition predates the actual written Scriptures; In a nutshell, if the Bible is the <i>written</i> Word of God, Sacred Tradition is the <i>unwritten</i> Word of God. As such, Sacred Tradition cannot ever contradict what the Magisterium has put forward nor what the Bible teaches, for Tradition is the Word of God and therefore, a source of unerring authority.<br />
<br />
At this point, the diligent Bible-Only Protestant will inevitably ask: "Where's that in Scripture? We never see any type of 'Sacred oral Tradition' in Scripture!" The issue here isn't whether or not we have proof of Sacred Oral Tradition in the Bible - because we do - but, whether or not Protestants can view this as a bona fide source of authority. In the Bible itself we have several instances in which St. Paul appeals to Sacred Tradition (not to be confused with Jewish "<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+15%3A1-9&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">traditions of men</span></a>") as a source of knowledge and ascendancy:<br />
<br />
<b><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2011:2&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Corinthians 11:2</span></a> </span></b><br />
<i>Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<b><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Thessalonians%202:15&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2 Thessalonians 2:15</span></a></b><br />
<i>Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Thessalonians%203:6&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2 Thessalonians 3:6</span></b></a><br />
<i>But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
In light of these biblical quotes, every Protestant must ask themselves the following question: Was Paul preaching orally inspired teachings at any point during his ministry, that is, was he teaching anything orally that was inspired by the Holy Spirit? If the answer is "yes," then the Catholic case for Sacred Tradition is vindicated, if the answer is "no," then clearly, it goes against what the Bible states in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Thessalonians+2%3A13&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Thessalonians 2:13</span></a> in which St. Paul says (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b> added):<br />
<br />
<i>For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which <b>you heard from us</b>, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God...</i><br />
<br />
This verse proves that St. Paul was in fact teaching orally inspired teachings and, once you couple this with the 3 passages from above, it is plain to see that there was indeed an oral Tradition within the Early Church that was not only being promulgated but, per the promise of Christ, was saved from fallacy. Indeed, there are several instances of Sacred Tradition within the pages of Scripture itself! The following Scripture passages reveal to us that there was some kind of extra-biblical teaching/knowledge that the authors of the New Testament adhered to since, they clearly quote teachings that are <u>NEVER</u> found in the Bible itself. Hence, we have to accept the fact that there is truly more Christian teachings that are not found in the Bible alone that were being transmitted orally by the Apostles and their disciples. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+20%3A35&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts 20:35</span></a>, we hear St. Paul say the following:<br />
<br />
<i>"I have shown you in every way, by laboring like this, that you must support the weak. And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.'"</i><br />
<br />
Never once in the Bible nor in any of the 4 Gospels, does Jesus ever say these words as they are quoted. The only way to reconcile this is to accept the Catholic position and realize that this was one example of an oral teaching of Jesus that was handed down to St. Paul and then down to us. In the first half of the Epistle of Jude, the author is explaining certain happenings that occurred in the the Old Testament and in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jude%201:9&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">verse 9</span></a>, the author states:<br />
<br />
<i>Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, "The Lord rebuke thee!"</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Here we read that St. Michael the Archangel and Satan were arguing over the body of Moses but, <u>NO WHERE</u> in the Old Testament do we ever read of such an exchange! Did the author of the Book of Jude make this up or, is it more plausible that this was part of the oral Tradition which he was taught and was relaying that information to his Christian audience? Additionally, anyone who has read Jude undoubtedly knows that Jude is warning Christians against false teachers, if - Protestants are right and the Bible Alone is the measure by which we are to test a false prophet - then isn't it rather odd that the author of Jude references something that is not found in the Sacred Scriptures in order to test the validity of what is a Christian teacher? Think about that, why would Jude quotes something not found in our Scriptures and use it in order to build up a case against false teachers? It would've made more sense to quote something much more mundane and part of the established Scriptures in order to prove what a true teacher should know but, instead, the author of Jude points us to something that is never found in the Bible and uses that as an example of what a true Christian should regard as the truth!<br />
<br />
It behooves us to therefore acknowledge that the person who wrote Jude knew about a confrontation between St. Michael and Lucifer and, it was so much a part of the author's teaching, that he references it. Simply put, this too must've been a teaching which was transmitted to him via an Apostle, or one of their disciples verbally because, clearly, it is never found in any of the New Testament books. But, even more astonishing is that the author mentions it because as far as he is concerned, IT IS part of the truth of the Christian faith! Out of all of the knowledge that the author of Jude had, doesn't it pique the curiosity of any Christian believer that the Holy Spirit inspired the author of Jude to use an extra-biblical reference? Again, the only way to reconcile this is to accept the Catholic position on Sacred Tradition because in affirming the Catholic position of God-inspired Tradition, we can safely arrive at the fact that God's Word in the Bible is backed up by God's Word in Sacred Tradition.<br />
<br />
There are several more passages that demonstrate some extra-biblical teachings that were so important that they too are quoted by the New Testament authors:<br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%202:23&version=NKJV" style="color: #3d85c6;" target="_blank">Matthew 2:23</a><span style="color: #3d85c6;"> </span></b><br />
<i>And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, "He shall be called a Nazarene." </i>(This direct quote, "He shall be called a Nazarene," is <u>NEVER</u> stated from any prophets in the Bible!)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Timothy%203:8&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><b>2 Timothy 3:8</b></span></a><br />
<i>Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds disapprove concerning the faith;</i> (<u>NO WHERE</u> in the Old Testament do we read about these 2 individuals opposing Moses! How did St. Paul know about these two people? Why would the Holy Spirit inspire St. Paul to write about them if they are never mentioned elsewhere in the canon of Scripture? How do we know that St. Paul didn't make this up?)<br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2011:35&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews 11:35</span></a></b><br />
<i>Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection.</i> (Here we see a direct reference from <a href="http://www.usccb.org/bible/2maccabees/7/" style="color: #3d85c6;" target="_blank">2 Maccabees chapter 7</a>, clearly the author of Hebrews was well aware of the apocryphal work, too bad most Protestants aren't!)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%204:5&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><b><span style="color: #3d85c6;">James 4:5</span></b></a><br />
<i>Or do you think that the Scripture says in vain, "The Spirit who dwells in us yearns jealousy?" </i>(<u>NO WHERE</u> in Scripture, do we ever see this quote appear! Is it possible that James, who was a relative of Jesus, had read this quote in an extra-biblical writing that he incorrectly thought was part of Sacred Scripture? If so, doesn't this call into question the legitimacy of James' Epistle and, indeed, the work of the Holy Spirit if in fact James was mistaken? Or, does it make much more sense that James knew of this teaching because it had been orally communicated to him through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit?)<br />
<br />
These are but a few examples that we can take from Scripture to show that there was indeed more being taught then simply what the Bible alone states. The best way to describe what Sacred Tradition is to think of it as the Catechism of the Catholic Church describes it in <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a2.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">paragraph # 81</span></a> states:<br />
<br />
"...[Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."<br />
<br />
Lastly we come to the Bible. Of all of the 3 sources of authority, the Bible is chronologically the final one and, in order to prove that this is the case, I will - for the sake of our Protestant brothers and sisters - use the Bible to demonstrate that this is indeed a fact. In Acts chapter 2 we see St. Peter giving his first sermon on the day of Pentecost, after he has addressed the crowd about the things that have transpired, we read in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%202:41&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">verse 41</span></a> the following:<br />
<br />
<i>Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
The question here is, WHAT were they added to? Well, in context, we have to conclude that they were added to the Body of Christ and according to St. Paul, the Body of Christ is in fact the Church. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians%201:18&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Colossians 1:18 </span></a>states in part:<br />
<br />
<i>And He is the head of the body, the church...</i><br />
<br />
St. Paul also states this again in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Eph%201:22-23&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Ephesians 1:22-23</span></a> when he mentions the following:<br />
<br />
<i>And hath put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be the head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
So what we have here is that, after St. Peter's first sermon, 3,000 new people became part of the early church, in fact within the context of Acts 2, we see that in <span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%202:47&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">verse 47</span></a> </span>the church continued to grow with more people being added to it daily. What is even more remarkable is that Acts 2 tells us exactly what these early Christians were in the habit of doing: in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%202:42-46&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">v</span></a><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%202:42-46&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">erses 42-46</span></a> </span>we see that these early believers adhered to the Apostle's teachings and fellow-shipped with them, they also partook in prayers with them as well as breaking bread with one another. Also, their beliefs were all the same (no different denominations) and they sold their possessions in order to help those in need.<br />
<br />
Now, I must ask all the Bible-Only Christians something, notice anything missing in the list of things the early Christians did? That's right, the early members of the Church didn't sit around reading the Bible as so many Protestants would have us believe, the reason for that is because the Bible wasn't compiled yet. However, it is easily seen that there most certainly was a church. Hence, the Church came before the Bible and not vice versa - I'll even go so far as to say that there can be a Church without the Bible due to the fact that it is explicitly demonstrated as such in Scripture itself!<br />
<br />
Just look at <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%208:1&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts 8:1</span></a>, in which we read that Saul - who would later become St. Paul - was persecuting the church, now, ask yourself: how is it possible that the man who would eventually write close to half of the New Testament be persecuting a church that didn't yet have his Scriptures to lead them to the fullness of God's Word? How is it possible that this early church knew the Word of God if they had no Scriptures??? Well, if you're a Bible-Only Protestant, you have to assume that this early church didn't know what they were doing because, after all, they didn't have the Bible! But, even then, how was the early church able to discern what was and what wasn't inspired Holy Writ if they didn't know what they were doing?<br />
<br />
Therefore we can legitimately ask: how was it possible for this early church to remain faithful to God without having the Bible? How did it happen that the early Christians were able to remain dutiful to Christ without the Bible and, how was it even possible for them to know who Christ was without the written Word? The only way that these questions can be settled is to accept the Catholic position that the early church had a teaching authority (that was preserved from error) as well as Apostolic Traditions (that were also preserved from error) by the Apostles and their disciples. And, it was these two unerring sources that the early [Catholic] Church used as the main criteria when it sat down and complied the Bible! Think about that, how do we know that the Bible is the infallible Word of God? Because it came from infallible sources that were free from all error due to the presence of God Himself! As Catholics this is how we know with 100% certainty that the 73 books in the Bible are the unerring Word of God; because they came directly from 2 sources that God Himself kept from ever being false. And make no mistake about it, <a href="http://www.bible-researcher.com/gelasius.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">ALL 73 books are listed by Pope Damasus I</span></a> at the Council of Rome in 382 A.D. and again they are reiterated in <span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.bible-researcher.com/carthage.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">397 A.D. at the Council of Carthage</span></a> </span>and, by 415 A.D., St. Augustine comments in <a href="http://v/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">chapter 8 of the 22nd book</span></a> of his <i>City of God</i>, the following:<br />
<br />
<i>For these most trustworthy books of ours contain in one narrative both the miracles that were wrought and the creed which they were wrought to confirm. The miracles were published that they might produce faith, and the faith which they produce brought them into greater prominence. For they are read in congregations that they may be believed, and yet they would not be so read unless they were believed. For even now miracles are wrought in the name of Christ, whether by His sacraments or by the prayers or relics of His saints...For the canon of sacred writings, which behoved to be closed, causes those to be everywhere recited, and to sink into the memory of all the congregations...</i><br />
<br />
Several things should jump out at the reader: 1) Augustine states that the Scriptures demonstrate Jesus' miracles, 2) miracles are currently being made in His name via the sacraments, prayers, relics of the saints and 3) the canon of Scripture is - according to St. Augustine - closed. This should come as no surprise since Augustine became the bishop of Hippo in 396 A.D. and, just 6 years prior in 393 A.D., the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_Hippo" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Synod of Hippo</span></a> convened and agreed with the previous canon of Scripture as put forward by Pope Damasus I at the Council of Rome. Therefore, St. Augustine bears witness to the fact that the early [Catholic] Church had already settled on the canon of Scripture by the early 400's - that's right, the Bible as we know it today was put together by the Catholic Church by the early 5th century. It would take another 1,200 years before Martin Luther would begin the ruination of 7 apocryphal books out of Holy Writ that would eventually, by the late 19th century, be omitted from every Protestant version of the Bible.<br />
<br />
Additionally, we know for a fact that St. Augustine spoke of the apocryphal books as being part of settled Scripture due to the fact that he wrote two letters to St. Jerome, who was the original author of the Latin Vulgate. In one letter (<a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf101.vii.1.LXXI.html" style="color: #3d85c6;" target="_blank">Letter 71 2:4</a>) Augustine asks for a Greek translation of the <a href="http://www.ccel.org/bible/brenton/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Septuagint</span></a>, which contained not only the 39 Old Testament books but the apocryphal works as well. He wrote this letter to Jerome in order to hammer out any differences between the Greek and Latin translation of the Scriptures so that no disagreement between the Greek and Latin churches would arise. In another letter to St. Jerome (<a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf101.vii.1.LXXXII.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Letter 82 5:35</span></a>), he specifically asks for a translation of the Septuagint in order to combat those who would seek to ruin the integrity of the Scriptures through unfaithful translations. <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf102.iv.XVIII.43.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Book 18, chapter 43</span></a> of St. Augustine's <i>City of God</i> is entitled: "<i>On the Authority of the Septuagint Translation, Which, Saving the Honor of the Hebrew Original, is to Be Preferred to All Translations</i>," and, in <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf102.v.v.viii.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Book 2 chapter 8</span></a> of <i>On Christian Doctrine</i> (written in the late 4th century), he names several of the apocryphal books as being not only accepted but canonical. In other words, much to Protestant chagrin, St. Augustine himself declares by the early 5th century A.D. that the Septuagint - complete with its collection of the apocryphal works - is included in the canon of Scripture that all churches are to use.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, to state that the Catholic Church officially made the canon of Scripture 73 at the Council of Trent is somewhat misleading. Due to the fact that all 73 books were, up to that time, rarely questioned or disputed and, when they were, the final authority of the Catholic Church ALWAYS trumped personal opinion. The reason why the Catholic Church had to make an official declaration at Trent was because the Church was trying to preserve God's Word and Christ's teachings against the various heresies of the Protestant "Reformation." So, were the 73 books that the Catholic Church used for over 1,000 years "official" before Trent? Technically no but, the simple fact of the matter that they were used and accepted for over a millennia is empirical evidence enough to demonstrably show that the Deuterocanonical (apocryphal) books were in fact part of accept Holy Writ, the copious amounts of citations from the Deuterocanonicals by the Early Church Fathers substantiate this claim. Additionally, isn't it rather contradictory that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha#King_James_Version" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">the original King James Version of the Bible published in 1611 had the apocryphal books in it</span></a>? Doesn't this also prove that the Deuterocanonical books had reason to be juxtaposed next to the rest of Scripture until later Protestants deemed them unnecessary - at which point -doesn't that go against <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2022:19&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Revelation 22:19</span></a>?<br />
<br />
Therefore, for Mr. Sproul to state that there is error "in every Christian communion" is not only a falsity but a very incriminating admission as to the soundness of his Protestant beliefs. Indeed, only a Protestant can conscientiously laud the fact that ALL denominations have to have some error because, in this manner, any issues that they may find or come across can be accepted as superfluousness and easily placated as long as you accept the "true" (or whatever you deem to be the "true") Gospel of Christ - so long as your personal interpretation of the Gospel of Christ conforms with his personal interpretation of the Gospel of Christ. How vainglorious is that?<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>@3:11-4:30 - <i>"I for example, being a student of Roman Catholic theology, could not possibly participate in a Mass. Because I know what the doctrine of the Mass is, that the church teaches that you have a real sacrifice of Christ in the Mass; unbloody to be sure but, it is still a sacrifice and, again at Trent, it is defined in terms of sacrifice...how can you believe in the once for all atonement of Christ and participate in a celebration of Him being sacrificed again as unbloodied as it may be? That's ghastly."</i></b><br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
Ah, yes. The "Jesus-died-once-for-all-so-there's-no-reason-to-resacrifice-Him-at-the-Mass" Protestant gambit. The issue here is that most, if not all, Protestants don't have a clue as to what the Sacrifice of the Mass really means and what it really is about. There is virtually no other bigger issue of misunderstanding between Protestants and Catholic then this; the Mass is not only our litugical service but it is also an offering that is made to God. And, in order to fully understand this view, let us first look at the reality that Christ is in fact our Eternal High Priest; whether you're a Protestant or a Catholic, this fact is unmistakable.<br />
<br />
In the Bible, the author of Hebrews, goes through the first 7 chapters setting up the reader for the ultimate goal of depicting Jesus as Eternal High Priest, indeed, by the time we get to <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+8%3A1&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews 8:1</span></a>, we read the following:<br />
<br />
<i>Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens...</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
We know that the author of the Book of Hebrews is directing our attention to Jesus as our new High Priest due to the fact that the word <span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #333333; font-family: BSTGreek; font-style: italic;">kefavlaion </span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #333333;">(</span><a href="http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/kephalaion.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">kephalaion</span></a><span style="color: #333333;">) </span></span></span>is used here in order to tell the reader that all of the previous 7 chapters worth of information can be summed up by realizing that Christ is our High Priest. There are only three places that the term "once-for-all" is used in the Book of Hebrews, we find it in chapter 7 verse 27, chapter 9 verse 26 and, in chapter 10 verse 10, let's look at two of these instances.<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #333333;"> </span>In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%207:27&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews 7:27</span></a>, we read:</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>[Jesus] who does not need daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the people's, for this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.</i></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><br /></i></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In analyzing this passage, we see that the author of Hebrews is making a distinct parallel between the Old Testament Levitical priesthood, as seen in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%2016&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Leviticus 16</span></a>, and Christ as being the new High Priest of the new covenant. This passage by itself seems to dictate that Christ, upon offering himself on the cross, ended all future needs for offering up anymore sacrifices. When one looks at the fact that the Catholic Mass is a sacrificial offering in and of itself, a Protestant can easily conclude that the [daily] Mass is not only a theological error but, a sacrilege that fundamentally goes against and misrepresents Jesus' once-for-all sacrifice at Calvary. <span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%209:25-26&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews 9:25-26</span></a> </span>states the following regarding Jesus once-for-all sacrifice:</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>...Nor did He enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of Himself.</i></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><br /></i></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">It would therefore appear, superficially, that there is indeed no use in "re-sacrificing" or "re-offering" Jesus since Christ had already done this once on the cross in 33 A.D. for all time. However, the issue here is in how we translate the phrase, "once-for-all" and, a</span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">s far as Protestants are concerned, Jesus' sacrifice was done in the past, it was completed, not to be repeated in any sense and, it most certainly is not something at is </span><span style="background-color: white;">ongoing and </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">continues to this day. But, is that a correct interpretation? That is, are Protestants correct in saying that Jesus' sacrifice is over and done with? Let's view these verses in the Book of Hebrews more closely.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">In order to see whether or not this is a proper way to view the phrase "once-for-all," let's look at what the first couple of verses in Hebrews chapter 8 tell us; remember, in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%207:27&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">chapter 7 verse 27</span></a>, we were told that Christ has no need to offer up sins for Himself nor for the people and then, two verses later, we read the following at the beginning of chapter 8: in <span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+8%3A1-3&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews 8:1-3</span></a> </span>we are told the following: </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<i>Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man. For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>Several things should stand out in these passages: <b>1) The Book of Hebrews tells us that "we have such a High Priest" in Christ. </b>Why is this significant? Well, because the author makes it abundantly clear that we CURRENTLY have Christ as our High Priest; notice that we are told, <i>"</i>we<i> have</i> such a High Priest" AND NOT, "we<i> had</i> such a High Priest." This is very important because it tells us that the Ascended Christ is now and forever our High Priest. <b>2) Christ is a Minister in Heaven.</b> This is important because it marries Christ to a ministry, after all, it would be totally bizarre for a minister NOT to have a ministry, right? <b>3) Christ offers up something as the High Priest.</b> That a high priest should offer gifts and sacrifices is cannot be refuted since the Old Testament clearly tells us of the <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%201;2;3;4;5&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">numerous offerings</span></a> that are given up to God by the Levitical priesthood (see <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2018&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Numbers 18</span></a>). So, let us summarize who Christ is: He is concurrently our heavenly High Priest and, as such, he now has a heavenly Ministry which He fulfills in the heavenly Sanctuary and, just like all of the high priests, He <u>HAS TO</u> offer up something on behalf of the people.<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">The question is, <i>what</i> does He offer? <i>What</i> does Jesus Christ offer in order to fulfill the role of the High Priest? The answer to that is simple: as our heavenly High Priest, there is only one thing that He can offer...Himself. Not in the bloodied manner in which He did on the cross but, as our High Priest,</span><span style="background-color: white;"> He </span><span style="background-color: white;">now</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"> offers continually and forever the infinite merit and satisfactions of His death and passion for us and for our salvation. This is why the Catholic Church can claim that the Sacrifice of the Mass is an "unbloody" sacrifice due to the fact that Christ <u>IS NOT</u> being sacrificed again nor is He dying, bruised, bloodied or beaten upon a stretch of wood</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">. As <a href="http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct22.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Session 22 chapter 2 of the Council of Trent</span></a> says:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><i>And forasmuch as, in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner, who once offered Himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross...The fruits of which<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oblation" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">oblation</span></a></span>, of that bloody one to wit, are recieved most plentifully through this unbloody one...</i></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">In other words, the Sacrifice of Christ that is re-presented (NOT represented) at the Mass, is an unbloody version of what happened on the cross in 33 A.D. and, i</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">n light of this view, the phrase "once-for-all" cannot denote a one-time, singular, over-and-done-with event. On the contrary, it signifies a "once-for-all" sacrifice that is done in perpetuity, that is, once but for all time. This is the only way in which Christ's role as a High Priest can by reconciled with what the author of Hebrews is trying to communicate to us because, lest we forget, that the duty of ALL of God's ordained priests was to give thanks and sacrificial offerings to God.</span> Therefore, it only makes sense that Jesus, as the heavenly and eternal High Priest, would also have something to give and offer and - as already stated - Jesus Christ gives us Himself forever, infinitely, and for all time, until He returns. This is why, unlike some Protestant denominations, the Catholic Church has always held that<span style="background-color: white;">, when Christ ascended, He ascended into heaven with His body, for if He did not, then it would be impossible for Christ to offer Himself up while administering in the heavenly sanctuary!<span style="font-size: x-small;">*</span> </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
And this is exactly what is going on at all Catholic Masses. The priest, being the only one who can Sacramentally communicate Christ's sacrifice to the faithful (<a href="http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct22.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Session 22 canon 8</span></a>), is therefore the agent of which Christ's ongoing sacrifice can truly be made manifest for the whole congregation. In partaking of Christ's eternal offering, the priest himself has been made a partaker in the divine goodness of Christ as <a href="http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct22.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Session 22 chapter 1</span></a> notes:<br />
<br />
.<i>..because of the weakness of the Levitical priesthood; there was need, God, the Father of mercies, so ordaining, that another priest should arise, according to the order of Malchisedech, our Lord Jesus Christ, who might consummate, and lead to what is perfect, as many as were to be sanctified...on the night in which He was betrayed, that He might leave, to His own beloved Spouse the Church, a visible sacrifice, such as the nature of man requires...He offered up to God the Father His own body and blood under the species of bread and wine; and, under the symbols of those same things, He delivered (His own body and blood) to be received by His apostles, whom He then constituted priests of the New Testament; and by those words, Do this in commemoration of me, He commanded them and their successors in the priesthood, to offer (them); even as the Catholic Church as always understood and taught.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
In other words, Christ established a priesthood so that His own sacrifice may be eternally given and offered properly to His faithful via the Catholic Church - which He also established. When one looks at the "once-for-all" sacrifice of Christ through the lens of Christian history and not Mr. Sproul's Calvinist/Reformationist view, it becomes very apparent as to why the early Christian converts and most (if not all) of the Saints came to have so much appreciation for the Eucharist. For it is truly in the Eucharist that Christ makes Himself physically present under the appearance of bread and wine through His priesthood. To call the Mass "ghastly," as Mr. Sproul put it, is not only a demonstration of ignorance but, a deliberate attack upon a matter that he really knows nothing about. Indeed, many Protestants are quick to state that there is no need for the Catholic Mass but, most Protestants have absolutely NO clue as to why we celebrate the Mass. Now that I've shown that the need for the Mass is there due to Christ's role as our new High Priest, I hope that many of you will look at the Mass a bit more differently.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
END OF PART 2</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">*<span style="background-color: white;">If Christ didn't need to offer up His body for our sake in the heaven, then there would've been no need for His body to be glorified in the first place. As such, the simple fact that Christ, after His resurrection, publicly displayed a physical body (see </span><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2024:13-35;John%2020:20&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">here</span></a> </span><span style="background-color: white;">as well as </span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1S.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">CCC #643 & #645</span></a><span style="background-color: white;">) and said physical body was seen </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%201:9-11&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">being carried off on a cloud</span></a><span style="background-color: white;"> at His ascension. Plainly stated is the fact the Christ went to heaven WITH a body. The reason being is that His body would be forever His offering in heaven that He gives to us through the Eucharist. The simple fact that Christ has a physical body and biblical proof supports this, gives weight to the Catholic argument for the Sacrifice of the Mass.</span></span>Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-20263504849267967842013-08-26T15:07:00.001-04:002014-08-06T11:50:11.603-04:00Protestant scholars still don't get it...We don't idolize nor worship Mary! Part 1<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /><iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/xplXGu4w0No?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
<br />
I've been forced to comment on this video due to the fact that many of the comments for this YouTube vid simply don't fully explain the Catholic position. Far too often Protestants make HUGE assumptions at what they personally believe to be Catholicism: "They pray to Mary!", "They worship a cookie!", "They practice necromancy with the help of the saints!", "The Pope is the anti-Christ!", etc., etc., ad nauseam...give me a break.<br />
<br />
The truth is that most anti-Catholic Protestants have no inkling of what Catholicism is. They <i>think</i> they know what it is but in reality they don't; most have been force fed lies in order to validate their invented heretical theology. Therefore, I will endeavor, over the course of the next 2 posts, to decimate these anti-Catholic scholars as well as all of the other anti-Catholic commentators of this video and maybe, just maybe, you'll see at just how wrong Sproul and McArthur really are about what Catholicism teaches.<br />
<br />
<b>@0:00- 0:16, An audience member asks: <i>"My family is still Roman Catholic and they still pray to Mary and the saints. Will this cause them to be kept out of heaven even though they claim to trust Christ for their salvation?" </i></b><br />
<b>R.C. Sproul: <i>"Maybe."</i></b><br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
Maybe? Maybe? In other words, this anti-Catholic CANNOT say with 100% certainty that "praying to Mary" isn't a condemnable sin - not that we Catholics "pray to" anyone save God but, if we did, according to R.C. Sproul there's a possibility that Catholics will still get to heaven. That response just turned the whole argument on it's head, by allowing a sense of doubt - a sense that if you "pray to Mary" - you're not going against God's will, Sproul has officially endorsed the Catholic point of view of our communion with the saints and, as we shall shortly see, God is okay with the Catholic notion of praying with the Saints.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>@0:17-0:22, <i>"It's a gross act of idolatry to be praying to Mary and the Saints, that's a very serious matter."</i></b><br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
Let's clear this up once and for all: CATHOLICS DO NOT "PRAY TO" MARY NOR THE SAINTS, we pray WITH and THROUGH the angels, saints and Mary! What do we mean by this? Well, simply put, since Catholics are part of Christ's one true Church here on earth (ecclesia militans) and the Saints and Mary are part of Christ's one true Church in heaven (ecclesia triumphans), we both share in the eternal body of Christ. Basically, if you're alive in heaven and you're alive on Earth, as a member of Christ's Body (the Church) and specifically <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%202:5&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">because of his mediation</span></a>, we are able to be in communion with Mary and the Saints. Therefore, since we all are joined through Christ and by Christ and we are all part of the same body of believers, we are afforded the benefaction of being able to ask the Saints and Mary to pray for us in the same exact manner that any Protestant would gladly ask a fellow member of their congregation to pray for them. When we ask a Saint to pray for us we are doing just that, asking a fellow member of our Catholic family to pray for us and - thanks to Christ - our communion with them is not impeded. [ NOTE: We "<i>pray</i>" to Mary in the sense that we ask her to offer up our petitions to God the Father through Christ<i> </i>and as we shall see later on, asking the Saints and angels to give up our prayers to Christ IS WHOLLY SCRIPTURAL.]<br />
<br />
This idea naturally sets up a series of Protestants rebuffs, head among those is the charge of necromancy. To begin with <a href="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/necromancy" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">necromancy</span></a> is the use of dead spirits in order to foretell the future and future events. CATHOLICS DO NOT DO THIS, we DO NOT ask the Saints to reveal to us future happenings and we DO NOT ask for Mary's intercessory prayers in order to give us next weekend's lotto numbers. Asking a spirit to forecast the future is strictly prohibited from Scripture and all through out Christian history! However, the bible itself does lend credence to the Catholic view of communing with the Saints, and the best Scriptural example for this Catholic position can be found in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%2028:3-20&version=KJV" style="color: #3d85c6;" target="_blank">1 Samuel 28:3-20</a>. In these verses we see that Saul has employed the aid of the witch/medium at Endor in order to conjure up the spirit of the prophet Samuel so that he may ask the spirit what to do against the advancing Philistine army. The spirit/ghost of Samuel replies that Saul has fallen out of favor with God and that he will surely die.<br />
<br />
Now, let's analyze what takes place in this occurrance. First, Saul is aided by a spiritual medium to bring up the spirit/ghost of Samuel. Second, the spirit/ghost of Samuel appears and, lastly, the spirit/ghost of Samuel predicts the future for Saul. This is exactly what transpires in this exchange, never once does the biblical text state that the apparition wasn't Samuel nor does the bible ever refer to the spirit/ghost of Samuel as a demon; the reason why I state this is because Protestants are quick to infer that something demonic happened in this biblical passage, to those Protestants that hold this position I ask that you show where we can make such an assumption, because clearly, this biblical passage states that it was in fact the spirit of Samuel that came back to speak with Saul. And so now I must ask some pivotal question: If Samuel was simply a dead human, how was his spirit/ghost able to bring itself back into the realm of the living under its own power? Was the prophet Samuel so strong in death that he had the ability to travel from the realm of the dead and into the living? Or, does it make much more sense that God ALLOWED the spirit/ghost of Samuel to come back to Saul?<br />
<br />
I think we all know the answer to that question. Clearly God had to of let Samuel's spirit visit Saul because if in fact a soul can come and go from the realm of the dead to that of the living, what point is there in having a heaven or hell? If a spirit can go to and fro from hell to earth - under its own power - why would God even set up hell as a form of punishment for the damned? Indeed, why stay in hell at all if a soul/spirit can escape? Conversely, if a spirit can go to heaven and then back to earth under its own volition, is heaven really such an awesome place that a spirit can choose to leave it at any time? What kind of reward is heaven if a spirit can decide to leave the reward for earthly confines?<br />
<br />
You can therefore see that the thought of a spirit being able to willfully travel to the temporial sounds rather ridiculous. Therefore I will make the conclusion that only God can permit such a thing to happen and, if God is the only being that can decide if a spirit can leave heaven or hell - for whatever reason He has - it would only makes sense that it was God who authorized Samuel's spirit/ghost make contact with Saul. In other words, God ALLOWED this to happen. God allowed the spirit of Samuel to communicate with Saul in order to reveal to him just what Saul's sin had wrought upon him, as if Saul didn't already know, right?<br />
<br />
This now brings up an even more crucial question that the Protestant has to wrestle with: If God did allow the spirit of Samuel to visit Saul to tell him the future, then didn't God aid in facilitating Saul to sin if necromancy is in fact a sin??? In Leviticus 19:31,<span style="font-family: inherit;"> God states the following:</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span style="background-color: white;">Do not turn to mediums</span><span class="crossreference" style="background-color: white; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top;" value="(<a href="#cen-NIV-3313A" title="See cross-reference A">A</a>)"></span><span style="background-color: white;"> or seek out spirits,</span><span class="crossreference" style="background-color: white; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top;" value="(<a href="#cen-NIV-3313B" title="See cross-reference B">B</a>)"></span><span style="background-color: white;"> for you will be defiled by them. I am the </span><span class="small-caps" style="background-color: white; font-variant: small-caps;">Lord</span><span style="background-color: white;"> your God</span></i></span><br />
<br />
In Deuteronomy 18:10-12, God states the following:<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span class="text Deut-18-10" id="en-NIV-5395" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire,<span class="crossreference" style="font-size: 0.65em; font-size: 0.65em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top;" value="(<a href="#cen-NIV-5395A" title="See cross-reference A">A</a>)"></span>who practices divination<span class="crossreference" style="font-size: 0.65em; font-size: 0.65em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top;" value="(<a href="#cen-NIV-5395B" title="See cross-reference B">B</a>)"></span> or sorcery,<span class="crossreference" style="font-size: 0.65em; font-size: 0.65em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top;" value="(<a href="#cen-NIV-5395C" title="See cross-reference C">C</a>)"></span>interprets omens, engages in witchcraft,</span><span class="text Deut-18-11" id="en-NIV-5396" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><span class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top;"> </span>or casts spells,<span class="crossreference" style="font-size: 0.65em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top;" value="(<a href="#cen-NIV-5396E" title="See cross-reference E">E</a>)"></span> or who is a medium or spiritist<span class="crossreference" style="font-size: 0.65em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top;" value="(<a href="#cen-NIV-5396F" title="See cross-reference F">F</a>)"></span> or who consults the dead.</span><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"> </span><span class="text Deut-18-12" id="en-NIV-5397" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">Anyone who does these things is detestable to the <span class="small-caps" style="font-variant: small-caps;">Lord...</span></span></i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span class="text Deut-18-12" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><span class="small-caps" style="font-variant: small-caps;"><br /></span></span></i></span>
So, did God go against His own word when He helped Saul to fall deeper into sin by letting the spirit of Samuel appear and predict the future to Saul? Well, if you're Protestant who believes that communicating with the dead is necromancy, then congratulations! You have officially declared God to be an agent of sin due to the fact that <u>GOD HELPED SAUL TO SIN</u> by providing the spirit of Samuel to be used in a sinful manner! If God detests such communication with the dead, the surely it would've been impossible for a sinless God to have done such a thing, right?<br />
<br />
The only way that we can reconcile this issue is if we realize two things: 1) Saul sinned when he went in search of a spiritual medium to contact the spirit of Samuel to forecast the future and 2) God let Saul communicate with the spirit/ghost of Samuel due to the fact that IT WASN'T A SIN TO DO SO. That's right, God let a human being contact a spirit because He did not - nor will He ever - see this communication as a bad thing; because if in fact communicating with the spirit of the dead was a sin, then clearly, by helping in this communication, God became and accessory to sin and therefore God Himself sinned. Since God cannot be something He is not, He can never sin, therefore, humans communing with the saints is permitted by God.<br />
<br />
A perfect example of this is seen in Jesus' Transfiguration where Christ is seen speaking to Moses and Elijah by 3 of His Apostles (See <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt.%2017:1-6&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matt. 17:1-6</span></a> & <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%209:28-36&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke 9:28-36</span></a>), how was it that Jesus was able to talk to the dead? He willed it so because He is God and He did not sin because communicating with the dead through Himself, that is, through Christ, IS NOT A SIN. Therefore, unlike Saul who went to a medium to contact a spirit, Catholics turn to the power of the one and only mediator who - by His death and resurrection - allows us to be constantly in communion with the angles and Saints. Through Christ, we can ask for prayers from our dearly departed brothers and sisters and, through Christ, they listen to us on the other side of death, how do we know this? Well in Revelation 8:3-4, we read the following:<br />
<br />
<i>Another angel came and stood at the altar, holding a gold censer. He was given a great quantity of incense to offer, along with the prayers of all the holy ones, on the gold altar that was before the throne.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Revelation 8:3-4 states that the incense that the angel was an offering were the prayers of those who belong to Christ. We also see the same thing Revelation 5:8, it states in part:<br />
<br />
<i>...the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each of the elders held a harp and gold bowls filled with incense, which are the prayers of the holy ones.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
IN CONTEXT, we know that these "holy ones" are Christ's faithful because <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+11%3A18%2CRevelation+15%3A1-8%2CRevelation+16%3A1-21&version=NASB" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Revelation 11:18</span></a> states that they are part of the people who will be rewarded by God. In<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2013:10&version=NASB" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Rev. 13:10</span></a></span>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2014:12&version=NASB" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">14:12</span></a> and <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2016:6&version=NASB" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">16:6</span></a> we see that the "holy ones" remain faithful during their persecution. Therefore, the Saints and angles in heaven offer up our earthly prayers to God per the biblical account of St. John's visions. If the Protestant notion is correct and we cannot communicate with the dead, then how is it possible that the prayers of the holy people of God are not only heard by the angels and Saints in heaven but offered up to God? Doesn't this explicitly prove beyond doubt that the angels and Saints intercede and take our prayers to God? If the Protestant concept is that Mary and the Saints are dead and therefore cannot do anything for us, how is that St. John sees angels and saints actually giving up our prayers before an altar to God?<br />
<br />
Another time in Scripture that we see spirits communicating with the living is at the time of Jesus' death when the veil in the sanctuary is torn. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+27%3A51-53&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew 27:51-53</span></a>, states the following:<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span class="text Matt-27-51" id="en-NKJV-24181" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split,</span><span class="text Matt-27-52" id="en-NKJV-24182" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><span class="versenum" style="font-size: 0.75em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: top;"> </span>and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; </span><span class="text Matt-27-53" id="en-NKJV-24183" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.</span></i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span></i></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">Here too again we see that God ALLOWED spirits to visit some people in Jerusalem! He allowed it specifically due to the fact that Christ had broken the chains of death through His miraculous resurrection and, it is precisely because of His passion and raising from the dead that we are able to be united to our heavenly family in the celestial court. Hence, God is not against the notion that humans can communicate with the Saints and Mary <u>through the mediation of Christ</u>. Therefore, us offering up our prayers to the Saints in heaven, as well as Mary, is not unbiblical; the idea that such a thing is somehow against true Christian thinking, however, is.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><b>@0:23-0:38 <i>"...I think there are thousands, perhaps millions, of people within the Roman Catholic Church who are really trusting in Christ and Christ alone for their salvation and not trusting the way of salvation their own Church teaches."</i></b></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><b><i><br /></i></b></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">Where do we explicitly find in the Bible that the belief in "Christ and Christ alone" is necessary for salvation? Indeed, Scripture <u>NEVER</u> mentions this as the <u>only means</u> of salvation! Let's go through the laundry list of necessary things for salvation per the Bible:</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span></span>
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%203:5&version=KJV" style="font-size: 16px;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John 3:5</span></a><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">, </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%203:21&version=KJV" style="font-size: 16px;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Peter 3:21</span></a><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"> & </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Titus%203:5&version=KJV" style="font-size: 16px;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Titus 3:5</span></a><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"> state that what is needed for salvation is <b>baptism</b>!</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%202:35-41&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts 2:38-41</span></a> & <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Peter%203:9&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2 Peter 3:9</span></a> state that salvation comes <b>by repentance</b>!</span></span><br />
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%202:4&version=KJV" style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Timothy 2:4</span></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"> & </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2010:26&version=KJV" style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews 10:26</span></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"> state that we must come to <b>the knowledge of truth</b>!</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%202:6-7&version=KJ21" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans 2:6-7</span></a> & <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%202:24&version=KJ21" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">James 2:24</span></a> mention<b> works</b>!</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2015:11&version=KJ21" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts 15:11</span></a> & <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians%202:8&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Ephesians 2:8</span></a> say that what is needed is <b>grace</b>!</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%205:9&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans 5:9</span></a> & <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%209:22&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews 9:22</span></a> say that we are saved <b>by His blood</b>!</span></span><br />
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Corinthians%203:6&version=KJV" style="font-size: 16px;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2 Corinthians 3:6</span></a><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"> states that it comes <b>by the work of the Spirit</b>!</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%205:17&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans 5:17</span></a> state that we are saved <b>by His righteousness</b>!</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians%202:16&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Ephesians 2:16</span></a> & <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians%202:14&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Colossians 2:14</span></a> mention that we are saved <b>by His Cross</b>!</span></span><br />
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2012:8&version=KJV" style="font-size: 16px;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke 12:8</span></a><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"> & </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2010:9&version=KJV" style="font-size: 16px;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans 10:9</span></a><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"> state that one is saved <b>by declaring it with our mouths</b>!</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2019:16-17&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew 19:16-17</span></a> </span>states that in order to get salvation, one must <b>keep the Commandments</b>!</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
And of course,<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%203:16&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John 3:16</span></a> & <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2016:31&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Acts 16:31</span></a> state that salvation comes from <b>believing in Christ</b>!<i>*</i><br />
<br />
And, lest we forget,<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%206:53-54&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John 6:53-54</span></a> states that salvation comes from <b>the Eucharist</b>!<br />
<br />
Whew! It would seem that simply believing in "Christ and Christ alone" as the sole path to salvation is not only unbiblical but, anti-biblical. Sorry Mr. Sproul! Only the Catholic Church recognizes ALL of these as means of salvation since the beginning of it's foundation close to 2,000 years ago!<br />
<br />
<b>@0:51-1:58, R.C. Sproul states that the Catholic Church denies the Gospel of Jesus Christ...due to the fact that we're not Protestants.</b><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="text Matt-27-53" style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">Having read and listened to numerous writings and recordings of R.C. Sproul over the last 3-1/2 years, I can unambiguously state that, Sproul has a HUGE issue with the fact that the Catholic Church does not believe in the wholly Protestant heretical invention of <i>sola fide</i>, that is <i>faith alone</i>. </span></span><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">As noted above, the notion that <u><b>only</b></u> a belief in Christ is needed for salvation doesn't hold water, and Sproul - like many Protestants - has convinced himself that</span><i style="font-size: 16px;"> sola fide</i><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"> is the means by which we are saved. </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">Not believing in <i>sola fide</i> (along with several other <i>solas</i>) is the biggest bugaboo that Sproul always likes to cite and he uses the Council of Trent as the springboard from which to sling these ill-conceived and historically inaccurate lies. </span><br />
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">Sproul simply loves to call attention to Trent, which outright condemned the many heretical notions of the Protestant "reformation" that were going on through Europe at the time. Let's get one thing straight, there is no way for me to go through the all of the documents of Trent in order to prove this point for it would completely take this post off of the main issues that this video alleges. Therefore, I will not go into <a href="http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/trent00.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">all the Sessions and Canons of Trent</span></a>, instead, I will solely focus on why<i> sola fide</i> - as a lone rule of faith needed to be saved and to proclaim Christ's true Gospel - was correctly addressed and admonished in Session 6 of the Council of Trent by the Roman Catholic Church. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
To begin with, Session 6 of Trent laid out the Catholic Church's unwavering position on Justification. In a nutshell, Justification is what we, as sons and daughters of God, must do in order to be made righteous before God; Justification is an important theological concept because, once we are justified, we can attain salvation for we are within God's good graces. While I won't be getting into the topic of Justification either, there are some points that need to be made from the Council of Trent, first among those is the fact that the Catholic Church believes that faith justifies man. That's right, man is made righteous through faith! As <a href="http://www.ewtn.com/library/councils/trent6.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Chapter 8 of the Sixth Session</span></a> at Trent states (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b> added):<br />
<br />
<i>But when the Apostle says that man is justified by faith and freely </i>(<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+3%3A24&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Rom. 3:24</span></a> & <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%205:1&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Rom. 5:1</span></a>)<i>, these words are to be understood in that sense in which the uninterrupted unanimity of the Catholic Church has held and expressed them, namely, that <b>we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and root of all justification</b>, without which it is impossible to please God</i> (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2011:6&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Heb 11:6</span></a>)<i>...</i><br />
<i><br /></i>As the Catholic Church explains, faith is the beginning, foundation, and root of all justification, hence, faith is an integral part of Justificatioin. Now, how does this not jive with the Protestant invention of <i>sola fide</i> that Sproul holds to? Simply put, the Catholic Church believes in <i>fide</i> without the <i>sola</i>, that is, faith is an indispensible and prominent ingredient in justifying the individual but, IT IS NOT sufficient in order to make a person righteous before God in and of itself. As Chapter 9 and 10 continues on to say (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b> added):<br />
<br />
<i>...it is necessary to believe that sins neither are remitted nor ever have been remitted except gratuitously by divine mercy for Christ's sake, yet it must not be said that sins are forgiven or have been forgiven to anyone <b>who boasts of his confidence and certainty</b> of the remission of his sins...</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Moreover, <b>it must not be maintained</b> that they who are truly justified must, without any doubt whatever, convince themselves that they are justified and that no one is absolved from sins and justified...by this faith alone - as if he who does not believe this, doubts the promises of God and the efficacy of the death and resurrection of Christ....</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>...Wherefore, <b>no one ought to flatter himself with faith alone, thinking that by faith alone he is made an heir and will obtain the inheritance</b>, even though he suffer not with christ, that he may be glorified with him </i>(<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Rom. 8:17</span></a>).<br />
<i><br /></i>
As Canon #9 of Trent so bluntly puts it:<br />
<br />
<i>If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification...let him be anathema.</i><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">In other words, faith is needed but, faith alone ain't gonna cut it. And why can't faith - in and of itself - not be enough to merit the grace of justification? Simply put, people of faith fall into sin and, when a person of faith falls into sin they lose the grace that God has bestowed upon them and must therefore regain justification again in order to get back into God's good graces.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">This is the raison d'etre for so many Protestant denominations and this is the main reason why Sproul states that the Catholic Church is apostate. For many Protestants, being justified before God is a one-time event that never goes away nor fades. It can be as simple as "accepting Him as your Lord and Savior," or by "giving yourself up to the Lord" or, responding to the altar call or, by <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXbRSnfYsog" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">saying a simple prayer</span></a> like the "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinner's_prayer" style="color: #3d85c6;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Sinners Prayer</span></a>." This one-time event magically credits you and your belief in Christ - whatever it may be - as just before God. How sophomoric and how insulting to God; to think that by simply believing in Jesus and saying a few words which acknowledge that you believe in Him automatically confer salvation and, to top it all off, this salvation cannot be undone. </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">This erroneous position is not only anti-Scriptural but goes against the first 1600 years of Christian history! </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">For the average Protestant like Mr. Sproul, the simple thought that they can lose salvation through their own fault is too shocking an idea to even entertain therefore, they have invented a belief system in which belief itself is the only necessary thing needed in order to be saved and, once you've accepted and believe in the power of Christ, you're assured of your eternal salvation regardless of the heinous sins that you may commit thereafter; losely stated, once you believe, truly believe, in Christ, nothing can disinherit you from the Kingdom of God. Oh, if it were only that easy! </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">Most Protestants simply cannot wrap their minds around the fact that a person can not only fall out of God's good graces but, they can - in fact - totally lose their heavenly reward. As the Bible states and I will now demonstrate, ANYONE can fall out of salvation even if they are/were justified, NOT BECAUSE GOD REJECTS THE PERSON but, BECAUSE THE PERSON REJECTS GOD'S SANCTIFYING GRACE. Additionally, Eternal Assurance is not - NOR HAS IT EVER BEEN - backed up by the Scriptures. One need only look at what Christ says in the Book of Revelation in order to prove that NO ONE is assured of salvation.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">In the 2nd and 3rd chapter of Revelation, Christ is telling St. John to record and relay several messages to the 7 churches in Asia Minor, among those messages is a very telling passage that makes absolutely no sense if one holds to the "nothing can unsave me because I believe" mentality. In </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+3%3A5&version=NKJV" style="font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Revelation 3:5</span></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"> Christ says the following:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><i>"He that overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels."</i></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><i><br /></i></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">In other words, Jesus "<i>will not blot out</i>" the names of those who already believe and - here's the kicker - <b><u>REMAIN</u></b> faithful. This statement itself is sufficient enough to prove that those who do not persist in the faith won't be named in the book of life but, of even more importance, is what Jesus infers here. He states that he "<i>will not blot out</i>" the faithful's name, meaning, that if He has the capacity of <i>not</i> blotting out names of those who think themselves to be faithful Christians, He also has the ability <i>to</i> blot out the names of the very same people; keep in mind who Jesus is talking to here: He's not talking to pagans, atheists or unbelievers, HE'S TALKING TO THE 7 CHURCHES OF ASIA MINOR!!! He's talking to the Churches filled with people who believe in Him and He is telling them that they must not only believe but <span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%203:3&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><b><u>REMAIN</u></b> faithful and repent</span></a> </span>in order to receive the reward of Heaven! Think about those early Christian believers in those 7 churches which, sacred </span><span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;">Tradition holds that St. John himself was the bishop of, a</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">nd then think about the fact that even the members of those churches, who are being shepherded by the Apostle who stood at the foot of the Cross, that even those early believers in Christ aren't assured of their salvation unless they persist in the faith constantly and continually! How is it possible then that these early believers of Christ are told BY CHRIST HIMSELF that they may be "blotted out" of salvation if, according to <i>sola fide</i> Protestants, all they ever needed was to believe in Christ and Christ alone? According to the words of Christ they weren't really saved, and yet, modern day <i>sola fide</i> Protestants are? Gimme a break. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">Still think that by simply believing, a Christian is saved and cannot lose their salvation? Well in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2015:5-6&version=LEB" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John 15:5-6</span></a>, Jesus states otherwise. He says (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b> added): </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><i>"I am the vine; you are the branches. The one who remains in me and I in him - this one bears much fruit, for apart from me you are not able to do anything. <b>If anyone does not remain in me, he is thrown out</b> as a branch, and dries up, and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned."</i></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">In other words, Jesus is stating that if someone who, at one point, believed and abided within Him loses faith and no longer believes, that person is cast out regardless of the fact that they, at one point, believed. This message is the same as the previous one mentioned in Revelation: one must believe but one must stay steadfast and faithful, if not, they risk falling out of the graces of God. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2013:18-23&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew 13:18-23</span></a>, Jesus interprets the parable of the Sower and the Seed and, in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2013:20-21&version=NKJV" style="color: #3d85c6;" target="_blank">verses 20-21</a>, we hear Jesus state the following (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b> added):</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><i>"But he who received the seed on stony places, this is <b>he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy</b>; yet he has no root in himself, <b>but endures only for a while</b>. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles."</i></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><i><br /></i></span>
So, some Christians receive the Word of God with great joy and, for a time, they believe. However, when things get difficult, they stop believing and they fall away. So, what happens to the seed that lands upon "the stony place?" According to Christ, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2013:5-6&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">in verse 6</span></a> He states that they will be "scorched" and will "wither away." The Alpha and Omega explicitly states that you can indeed lose your faith and, if you do, your destiny is not in heaven but in hell, where you will be scorched and wither away. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%205:13&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew 5:13</span></a>, Christ is addressing the crowd at the Sermon of the Mound and he says:<br />
<br />
<i>"You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men."</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Jesus Christ, the second person of the Blessed Trinity, states here that those who believe in Him and His words are "the salt of the earth" but, what happens if this belief is lost? Then those who were once "seasoned" are good for nothing and to be thrown out! In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2025:1-13&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew 25:1-13</span></a>, Jesus tells us the parable of the 10 Virgins who were awaiting the bridegroom in order to enter into the wedding feast. In this parable, the oil represents the Holy Spirit, the virgins represent Christians, the lighted lamp represents the faith, hope and belief we have in Christ and, the bridegroom naturally represents Jesus. Here we see that half of the young maidens didn't bring enough oil as they awaited the bridegroom in order to enter the wedding party together. His delay causes them all to fall asleep and, at midnight, the bridegroom finally starts to make his way toward the party at which point the 5 lazy virgins realize that they don't have enough oil and cannot trim their lamps. They plead with the other 5 virgins who brought enough oil for themselves and are told that there is not enough oil for all of them and that they should go and buy some more oil from the merchants and, when they come back, the door to the party is locked; at verses 10-13 we read:<br />
<br />
<i>And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding; and the door was shut. Afterward the other virgins came also, saying, "Lord, Lord, open to us!" But he answered and said, "Assuredly, I say to you, I do not know you."</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man is coming.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
As you can see, the lazy maidens - at one point - where filled with belief in the bridegroom (Jesus) and His feast but, as they sat around waiting, they fell asleep and, their faith faded. They then weren't burning for His love as they once were and, as a result, they were left out of the <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+19%3A6-9&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Marriage Supper of the Lamb</span></a>. Again, we see the same motif, you once had faith and believed but, you lost your belief and lost your salvation along with it. Our Blessed Lord says you can lose your salvation, Protestants say otherwise, who are we to believe?<br />
<br />
Still think your salvation is assured? St. Paul begs to differ. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2015:1-2&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">1 Corinthians 15:1-2</span></a>, we read (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b> added):<br />
<br />
<i>Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, <b>if </b>you hold fast that word which I preached to you - <b>unless you believed in vain</b>.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Basically, St. Paul states that <b><u>IF</u></b> you hold firmly to the word he has preached, you are saved. <u><b>IF</b></u> you don't then you believed in vain and are not saved. So, if one believes in what St. Paul is teaching and accepts the Gospel of Christ but doesn't remain faithful, then that person, according to St. Paul, loses salvation even though they once believed. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2011:22&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans 11:22</span></a>, St. Paul says (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b> added):<br />
<br />
<i>Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, <b>if </b>you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off.</i><br />
<br />
Translation: continue to do God's work and believe in Him if not, you're cut out of His good graces; that little word "<i>if</i>" has a huge implication if someone loses sight of Jesus' message, doesn't it? Finally we see in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Philippians+2%3A12&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Philippians 2:12</span></a> St. Paul says:<br />
<br />
<i>Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling;</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Wait, what? "<i>Work out</i>" your salvation? Why didn't Paul just tell the Church at Philippi, that has always obeyed according to him, not to worry because, after all, they're saved! They're obeying and they're believing, right? So why doesn't Paul simply state that they should rejoice for they are all saved since they believe? Again, I have to ask, who should we believe, <i>sola fide</i> Protestants or the Apostle Paul? Okay so maybe those crazy Philippians weren't saved but, surely, St. Paul himself had to of been saved, right? I mean he was <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Corinthians%2011:25&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">ship wrecked, beaten and stoned</span></a> as well as<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts16:22-24&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">imprisoned</span></a> </span>and suffered martyrdom for Christ; if anyone merited salvation, it was Paul and yet, this is what he says in<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Timothy+4%3A7&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2 Timothy 4:7</span></a></span>:<br />
<br />
<i>I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith</i>.<br />
<br />
Why did St. Paul even boyher to say this toward the end of his life if he was assured of his salvation? If he was already saved, why did the Holy Spirit inspire him to even mention this? Boy, St. Paul sure was dumb, wasn't he? He could've learned a couple of things from modern day Protestants, don't you think? After all that Paul went through and even he wasn't assured of his own salvation, how can any Protestant claim otherwise? How prideful and arrogant.<br />
<br />
Lastly, let me address the "once saved always saved" Protestant retort from <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2010:27-29&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John 10:27-29</span></a>, which states:<br />
<br />
<i>My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
For the Protestant who believes in Eternal Assurance via <i>sola fide</i>, this passage would seem to vindicate that teaching. While nothing OUTSIDE of the believer can remove them from Christ, who is to say that the believer cannot REMOVE THEMSELVES from Christ? In other words, nothing can take you away from Christ except yourself - you can forfeit salvation by your actions and, if there be any doubt, St. Paul tells us the following in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2010:26-31&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hebrews 10:26-27</span></a>:<br />
<br />
<i>For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation...</i><br />
<br />
And, my personal passage that proves that once you believe you are not saved, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2013:11&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans 13:11</span></a>:<br />
<br />
<i>"...for now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed."</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">I would really like to know how to reconcile that verse with the Protestant notion of <i>sola fide</i>; how is it that we can get closer to salvation if in fact all we need is a one-time belief-event that justifies and saves us? If in fact we believe and are saved, why did Paul state that salvation was nearer then when he first believed? Did Paul not really believe in the beginning of his ministry and only later come to truly believe and therefore found salvation closer then it was before? Were the believers of the church at Rome already saved when Paul wrote this, if so, why even mention that salvation is now closer then it was before if they were already saved? These are the tough questions that faith alone Protestants must answer if they subscribe to the <i>sola fide</i> as the primary virtue that attains salvation for the believer. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">As for the Catholic Church, she has always held what the bible has taught in terms of being saved and that is, that not all are saved regardless of their belief in Christ (see <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7%3A13-14&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew 7:13-14</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022:14&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew 22:14</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%2013:22-27&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke 13:22-27</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%209:27&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Romans 9:27</span></a>). She has always stated that one must not only have faith but, continue to be sanctified in order for us to become perfect as Christ commanded us to do in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%205:48&version=NIV" style="color: #3d85c6;" target="_blank">Matthew 5:48</a>, hence the need for the Sacraments - remember, the Sacraments DO NOT SAVE, they sanctify us in order to be more Godly and attain salvation (see <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P32.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">CCC #1123</span></a>). In order to demonstrate that this was, and has always been, the teaching of the Catholic Church, here are some quotes from just a few famous Catholics pre-Council of Trent:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">"The majority of men shall not see God, excepting those who live justly, purified by righteousness and by every other virtue."</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">-St. Justin Martyr, 150 A.D.<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.iv.iv.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><i>Dialogue with Trypho,</i> chapter 4</span></a></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
"The following words of the Gospel, 'many are called, but few are chosen' cannot but inspire us with terror; for many receive the light of faith, but to a few only is granted the happiness of heaven."<br />
- Pope St. Gregory the Great, 570 A.D. <i><a href="http://thedivinelamp.wordpress.com/2011/02/19/septuagesima-sunday-pope-st-gregory-the-greats-homily-on-matt-201-16/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Homily on Matthew 20:1-16</span></a></i>.<br />
<br />
"Christ's flock is called 'little' (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+12%3A32&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke 12:32</span></a>) in comparison with the greater number of reprobates."<br />
- St. Bede the Venerable<br />
<br />
"Faith is indeed great and brings salvation, and without it, it is not possible ever to be saved. Itsuffices not however of itself to accomplish this, but there in need of a right conversion...after they had accomplished the most part of the journey, when they were at the very doors, at the haven itself, they were sunk into the sea. This I fear for you also. This [the meaning of] after the same example of unbelief."<br />
- St. John Chrysostom, 360 A.D. <i><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf114.v.xi.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Sermon on Hebrews 4:11-13</span></a></i><br />
<i><br /></i>
"It is certain that few are saved."<br />
- St. Augustine, 418 A.D. <i><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/160361.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Sermon 61 On The New Testament</span></a></i><br />
<br />
"I exhort you, therefore, not to faint in your afflictions, but to be revived by God's love, and to add daily to your zeal, knowing that in you ought to be preserved that remnant of true religion which the Lord will find when He comes on the earth."<br />
- St. Basil the Great, 360 A.D. <i><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3202257.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">257th Letter</span></a></i><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">"One day, St. Macarius found a skull and asked it whose head it had been. "A pagan's!" it replied. "And where is your soul?" he asked. "In Hell!" came the reply. Marcarius then asked the skull if its place was very deep in Hell. "As far down as the earth is lower than Heaven!" "And are there any other souls lodge even lower?" "Yes! The souls of the Jews!" "And even lower than the Jews?" "Yes! The souls of bad Christians who were redeemed with the blood of Christ and held there privilege so cheaply!" </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;">- Blessed James of Voragine, 1260 A.D.<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/goldenlegend/GoldenLegend-Volume2.asp#Macarias" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><i>Golden Legend</i>, The Life of St. Marcarius</span></a></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><br /></span></span>
"Those who are saved, are in the minority."<br />
- St. Thomas Aquinas, 1265 A.D. <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1023.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><i>Summa Theologica,</i> Prima Pars, question 23</span></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
END OF PART 1</div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/xplXGu4w0No?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">*</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: x-small;">Note that these two passages when read in context refer to baptism as a means of salvation through the belief in Christ. In John 3:1-8, clearly demonstrates that water baptism is needed in order to be "born again" and attain salvation; the same thing is noted again in John 3:22-23 when Jesus and company go baptizing and, in the latter verses, we see that St. John the Baptizer states that it is the belief in Christ which saves. In other words, John 3 has a certain motif: baptism (verses 1-8), salvation (verses 12-18), baptism (verses 22-26), salvation (verses 27-36). In Acts 16 we see that, here too, baptism plays a role within the context of believing in Christ, in verses 30-33 we see that the belief is accompanied by baptism.</span>Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-81109962681531142732013-08-12T14:00:00.005-04:002013-08-12T14:03:54.535-04:00Did the Early Church Fathers believe in Sola Scriptura? Part 2I've had such a great response from the last post, that I have decided to continue this post as a series! So, instead of giving you one or two little quotes from an Early Church Father, I will give you several so-called <i>sola-scriptura </i>quotes so that we may be able to analyzed them; in this manner if any Protestant ever tells quotes from a specific work from the Patristics, you'll be able to refer back to these posts and see how to properly defend the Catholic faith! This will be the second part of the series and I will post more on the Early Church Fathers and Sola Scriptura in the future. As for now, let us look at 2 more Early Church Fathers who Protestants claim believed in the Bible Alone.<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“But
those who are ready to toil in the most excellent pursuits, will not desist
from the search after the truth, till they get the demonstration from the
Scriptures themselves.” </span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> – </span></b><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iv.vii.xvi.html"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Clement
of Alexandria, <i>Stromata</i>, Chapter 16</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Yet another widely used quote to demonstrate that the
Early Church believed in sola scriptura as far back as the late 2<sup>nd</sup>
century. Unfortunately this quote undoes the Protestant belief in scripture
alone when we read, just a few paragraphs down, the following (<b>my emphasis</b> added):<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“And
if those also who follow heresies venture to avail themselves of the prophetic
Scriptures; in the first place<b> they will
not make use of all the Scriptures, and then they will not quote them entire,
nor as the body and texture of prophecy prescribe.</b> But, selecting ambiguous
expressions, they wrest them to their own opinions, gathering a few expressions
here and there; not looking to the sense, but making use of the mere words. For
in almost all the quotations they make, you will find that they attend to the
names alone, while they alter the meanings; neither knowing as they affirm, nor
using the quotations they adduce, according to their true nature.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">My humble reader, if St. Clement of Alexandria states
that taking quotes OUT OF CONTEXT and using them as a weapon in a theological
argument is a heresy, well then, I suggest to you that this is THE definition
of Bible-alone Protestantism! Far too often do we see Protestants quoting a
particular verse or a particular passage when attempting to substantiate a
Protestant belief, doctrine or dogma. This crucial and fundamental Protestant
tactic is to be, therefore, done away with per St. Clement for – as he stated –
<u>IT IS</u> a heresy. Hence, ANY Protestant that attempts to quote a Church
Father or a Bible verse by proof-reading the text is wholly committing a
heretical act and should be called out on it! BUT, more importantly is what St.
Clement says just a couple paragraphs afterwards (<b>my emphasis</b> added):<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“…through
the propensity to sloth, they push truth away, or through the desire of fame,
endeavor to invent novelties. For those are slothful who, having it in their
power to provide themselves with proper proofs for the divine Scripture from
the Scripture themselves, select only what contributes to their own pleasures. <b>And those have a craving for glory who
voluntarily evade, by arguments of a diverse sort, the things delivered by the
blessed Apostles and teachers, which are wedded to inspired words; opposing the
Divine Tradition by human teachings, in order to establish heresy.”<o:p></o:p></b></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">In other words, heretics do two things: they give their
own personal meaning to the Scriptures by not using Scripture properly and,
they deny the orally inspired words of the Apostles and their disciples, that
is, they reject Apostolic Tradition. That’s right, this Early Church Father who
pro-sola scriptura Protestants like to quote, decimated the entire notion of
Protestantism over 1,350 years before it was ever invented! He clearly and
unambiguously stated that taking a verse out of context and rejecting Apostolic
Tradition, which is the bread and butter of Protestantism, make any Christian
believer a heretic. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">Therefore, St. Clement of Alexandria, cannot be quoted in order to prove
<i>sola scriptura</i>.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">BONUS
POINT OF TRUTH:<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Need more proof that Apostolic Tradition was
foundational for St. Clement of Alexandria? Look no further than </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iv.i.i.html"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">the
very first chapter of <i>Stromata</i></span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">. Towards
the middle of the first chapter, Clement is stating whom he learned the faith
from and then says the following:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“…they
</span></i><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">[those
who taught St. Clement] <i>preserving the tradition of the blessed
doctrine derived directly from the Holy Apostles, Peter, James, John and Paul,
the sons receiving it from the father, came by God’s will to us also to deposit
those ancestral and apostolic seeds. And well I know that they will exult; I do
not mean delighted with this tribute, but solely on account of the preservation
of the truth, according as they delivered it. For such a sketch as this, will,
I think, be agreeable to a soul desirous of preserving from escape the blessed
Tradition.”</i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">Basically, right from the beginning of Clement’s
<i>Stromata</i>, he espouses the authority
of Sacred Tradition and its importance in both the Church and the Scriptures!</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“But
there is no evidence of this, because Scripture says nothing…” <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> – </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.vii.vi.html"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Tertullian,
<i>On the Flesh of Christ</i>, chapter 6</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“The
Scripture says nothing of this, although it is not in other instances silent…I
do not admit what you advance of your own apart from Scripture.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> -</span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.vii.vii.html"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Tertullian,
On <i>the Flesh of Christ</i>, chapter 7</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“But
to what shifts you resort, in your attempt to rob the syllable of its proper
force as a preposition, and to substitute another for it in a sense no found
throughout the Holy Scriptures!”</span></i></b><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> –</span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.vii.xx.html"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Tertullian,
<i>On the Flesh of Christ</i>, chapter 20</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“We
have, however, challenged these opinions to the test, both of the arguments
which sustain them, and of the Scriptures which are appealed to, and this we
have done ex abundant…”</span></i></b><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> –</span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.vii.xxv.html"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Tertullian,
On the Flesh of Christ, chapter 25</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">(<u>DISCLAIMER</u>: Tertullian <i>was</i> a hardcore defender of the true faith for most of his life. I
say <i>was</i> because, unfortunately,
Tertullian fell into heresy later on in his life. He became a member of the
heretical Monatist sect which placed some inordinate puritanical practices in
lieu of new prophecies as well as false revelations from God. As such,
Tertullian isn’t really an “Early Church Father” in the extreme sense of the
title, much like Origen he is more of an ecclesiastical writer. However, most
of his pre-Monatists works are absolute gems of Early Christianity. Therefore,
I will not refer to Tertullian as an Early Church Father per say but, a Church writer
instead.)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">Protestants who stick to <i>sola
scriptura</i> simply love Tertullian. More than any other 3<sup>rd</sup>
century Church writer and defender, Tertullian definitely used the Holy Scriptures
when </span><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">attacking all forms of heresy. In particular, the
quotes above are taken from his work entitled </span><i style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">On the Flesh of Christ</i><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">, or, </span><i style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">De</i><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">
</span><i style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">Carne Christi</i><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">. In this work, Tertullian
sets out to not only refute several heretics but, he also debunks a lot of
their misunderstandings; chief among these heretics is a “Christian” named
Marcion.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">The Marcionites were heretics for several reasons: to
begin with, they believed St. Paul to have been Christ’s head Apostle instead
of Peter, they denied the Incarnation, and they believed that there were 2 gods
- a good god and a bad god. They reasoned from Scriptures that there was a bad
god during the time of the Old Testament and there was another god during the
time of the New Testament, that is, during the time of Christ. As such they
stated that Christ could not be the Son of the God of the Jews primarily due to
the fact that Christianity was the New Covenant and anything that had to do
with the Judaism had to be discarded…that included the entirety of the Old
Testament! <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">That’s right, Marcion rejected outright the Old
Testament due to its antiquated cruelty and rudimentary practices. Marcion
therefore theorized that this Old Testament god was not the Supreme God but a
lesser god. The real issue for Marcion then became in how to reconcile the New
Testament verses that reference the Old Testament and, much like the grand
heretic that he was, Marcion edited out all text that ran contrary to his
beliefs. In other words, Marcion created his own personal New Testament; which
consisted in having only eleven of Paul’s epistles and one Gospel which he
edited, that of St. Luke. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Therefore once we realize who, CONTEXTUALLY SPEAKING,
Tertullian is addressing in these quotes, is it any wonder as to why Tertullian
quotes from the Scriptures so much??? Think about it, Tertullian is fighting
against a heresy that not only negates the existence of one Creator but, has
discarded <u>ALL</u> of the Hebrew Scriptures and has settled with a mutilated
version of the New Testament. Is it really that surprising that Tertullian
would rely so heavily on the true Scriptures when combating a heretic who
mangled Scriptures to fit his personal ideology? </span><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">Of course not!!! </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">These proof-read quotes of Tertullian don’t prove <i>sola scriptura</i> for two
reasons: <b>1) Tertullian NEVER states that
Scripture in and of itself is what is needed in order to disprove heretical and
conflicting dogma.</b> In other words, he never states that the Scriptures are
the only thing to be used to justify a belief or practice and, that brings us
to the next reason: <b>2) Tertullian was a
HUGE believer in Apostolic Tradition and the Church as sources of genuine authority.</b>
So much so, that he uses Apostolic Oral Tradition as a means of justifying the authentic
Scriptures! In </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.vii.ii.html"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">chapter
2 of <i>On the Flesh of Christ</i></span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">,
Tertullian states that Marcion has rejected the Scriptures which were “handed down”
and “transmitted” from the Apostles themselves (<b><i>my emphasis</i></b> added):<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">“…I suppose you have
had, O Marcion, the hardihood of blotting out the original records (of history)
of Christ, that His flesh may lose the proofs of is reality. But, prithee, on
what grounds (do you do this)? <b>Show me
your authority</b>. If you are a prophet, foretell us a thing; if you are an apostle,
open your message in public; if a follower of apostles, side with apostles in
thought; if you are only a (private) Christian, <b>believe what has been handed down to us</b>…What you believed to be of
a different character, had been handed down just </span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">as
you [once] believe it. <b>Now that which
had been handed down was true, in asmuch as it had been transmitted by those
whose duty it was to hand it down.</b> Therefore, when rejecting that which had
been handed down, you reject that which was true. You had no authority for what
you did.”</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">The one thing we must remember is that the Apostles DID
NOT have a Bible, therefore when they spoke, they spoke God-inspired revelation
and, it is precisely this oral transmission that Tertullian says was “handed
down” and “transmitted” in a truthful manner via the Apostles. How do we know
that this is what Tertullian is saying? Well in <i>Prescription Against Heresies</i>, another anti-Marcionian work of
Tertullian, </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.iii.xx.html"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">chapter
20</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">
</span>states that unless a church was founded by an Apostle, it is a heretical church
and therefore cannot have the truth:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“…they
[the Apostles] obtained the promised power of the Holy Ghost for the gift of
miracles and of utterance; and after first bearing witness to the faith in
Jesus Christ throughout Judaea, and founding churches (there), they next went
forth into the world and preached the same faith to the nations. They then in
like manner founded churches in every city, from which all the other churches,
one after another, derived the traditions of the faith, and the seeds of
doctrine, and are every day deriving them, that they may become churches.
Indeed, it is on this account only that they will be able to deem themselves
apostolic, as being the offspring of apostolic churches. Every sort of thing
must necessarily revert to its original for its classification.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">What Tertullian just said should send shivers up the
spines of any Protestant who dares to make the claim that Tertullian was a
pro-sola scriptura believer! For unless the Protestant can make a historically
accurate claim that their church, doctrines and tradition all stem from the
Apostles, as Tertullian claims, they shouldn’t even be calling themselves Christians!
Indeed, according to Tertullian, </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.iii.xv.html"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">they
shouldn’t even be using nor reading the Christian Scriptures!</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">So how, therefore, can we tell what is and isn’t an
Apostolic Church? Well, in </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.iii.xxxii.html"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">chapter
32 of <i>Prescription Against Heretics</i></span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">,
Tertullian states the #1 thing that makes a church a true church is succession.
That’s right, the pivotal Catholic practice of succession is what this Early Church writer
stated is the hallmark of Christ’s true church and not a heretical church. In
chapter 32 he says:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">“But if there be any
(heresies) which are bold enough to plant themselves in the midst of the
apostolic age, that they may thereby seem to have been handed down by the
apostles, because they existed in the time of the apostles, we can say: Let
them produce the original records of their churches; let them unfold the roll
of their bishops, running down in due succession from the beginning in such a
manner that [that first bishop of theirs] shall be able to show for his
ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men..For this
is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the
church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John; as
also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like
manner by Peter. In exactly the same way the other churches likewise exhibit,
whom, as having been appointed </span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">to
their Episcopal places by apostles, they regard as transmitters of the
apostolic seed. Let the heretics contrive something of the same kind…For their
very doctrine, after comparison with that of the apostles, will declare by its
own diversity and contrariety, that it had for it author neither an apostle nor
an apostolic man…”</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">There is only one modern day Church that can trace its
heritage back to not only the apostolic era but, to Christ himself and, if you
do believe in <i>sola scriptura</i>, then
you are not part of that Church. Because obviously, Tertullian didn’t believe that
the Bible alone was or is the sole source of authority, he held Tradition and
the Church as valid sources of authority – just like the Catholic Church does
so today. Tertullian himself believed wholly Catholic ideas; for instance, he believed that the true Christian must be baptized with
water, he believed in Holy Orders, the true Christian has to do the sign of the cross, and receives the Sacrament of Confirmation
as well as the fact that the true Christian is sanctified through the
Eucharist. Proof of each of these things are noted by Tertullian in<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> </span></span><i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.viii.viii.html" target="_blank">On the Resurrection of the Flesh</a> </span></span></i><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.viii.viii.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">chapter 8</span></a></span>:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“The
flesh is washed in order that the soul may be cleansed; the flesh is anointed,
that the soul may be consecrated; the flesh is signed with the cross, that the
soul too may be fortified; the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands,
that the soul maybe illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds on the body and
blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may fatten on its God.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Sorry Protestants, but that’s what the Catholic Church has
always believed in and still, to this day, practices. Hence, Tertullian IS NOT
an authoritative claim in favor of <i>sola
scriptura</i>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><u><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">BONUS
POINT OF TRUTH: <o:p></o:p></span></u></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">He is sometimes referred to as the “Father of Latin
Christianity” and is also the oldest Latin writer to use the term Trinity
(Trinitas) as well as giving the oldest known explanation of the Trinitarian
doctrine.</span><i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">End of Part 2</span></div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-43430217344085116082013-07-31T14:56:00.002-04:002013-07-31T14:56:32.283-04:00Did the Early Church Fathers believe in Sola Scriptura? Part 1<i>Sola Scriptura</i> is the basis for many a Protestant heresy. It explicitly states that the Bible alone contains all knowledge for salvation and holiness, that is, the Bible is the complete and authoritative rule for the Christian. Many, if not most, of all Protestant denominations today strictly adhere to this unbiblical doctrine; indeed, one must definitely find it most curious that the Bible itself NEVER once mentions such a thing nor does it ever point to itself as the sole rule of faith! Therefore, in order to offer validity to this most unbiblical doctrine, Protestant theologians have attempted to demonstrate that the Early Church Fathers - who were without a doubt Catholic - were believers in <i>Sola Scriptura</i>.<br />
<br />
Now, why would Protestants want to do such a thing? Well, truth be told, Protestants need to do this because of Protestantism itself! What do I mean by this? Let me explain...<br />
<br />
You see, Protestants have a REALLY big issue and that issue is that they don't have the historical evidence to back up their personal belief system. Their pedigree only extends to the founding or, in some cases, invention of their church and their doctrines. As such, when any Protestant denomination attempts to show some form of historicity within their congregation, they can only - at the very most - extend the founding of their church to the mid-1500's when Martin Luther established or, better stated, invented his personal brand of Christianity. Attempting to apply ANY Protestant belief before the 1500's is simply a fool's game. However, that has never stopped some foolhardy Protestants from trying to take their man-made and humanly inspired theological whims and attempting to affix them in the Early [Catholic] Church.<br />
<br />
Therefore, it is my main objective in this post to absolutely and categorically demonstrate that the Early Church Fathers WERE NOT adherents to this heretical notion. I will be posting quotes from the Early Fathers from several Protestant websites which have labeled them as proof of Sola Scriptura among the Patristics and then I will show how easy it is to refute any attempts to cast their doctrines upon our Church members.<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“We have learned from none others the plan of our<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i></b><b><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">salvation</span></i></b><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, than from those through whom the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i></b><b><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Gospel</span></i></b><span class="apple-converted-space"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></b></span><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">has come down to us, which they did at one<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>time proclaim in public, and, at a
later period, by the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i></b><b><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">will</span></i></b><span class="apple-converted-space"><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></b></span><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">of<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i></b><b><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">God</span></i></b><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, handed down to us in the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i></b><b><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Scriptures</span></i></b><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, to be the ground and<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>pillar<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>of our<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i></b><b><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">faith</span></i></b><b><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">.” </span></i></b><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">– </span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103301.htm"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">St.<b> </b>Irenaeus, <i>Against Heresies</i> Book 3: Chapter 1, paragraph 1</span></span></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Uh oh! An Early Church Father proclaiming
that the Scriptures are where we get the plan for salvation as well as being
the foundation of our faith! And, since the Scriptures say nothing about
needing Sacraments in order to be saved, the Catholic Church’s Sacramental
system is not needed! Well, unfortunately for an anti-Catholic Protestant,
there are at least two things that we need to take a look at when analyzing
these so-called <i>sola scriptura </i>Early
Church Father quotes; <b>first we need to see the quote <u>IN CONTEXT</u></b>. Protestants are
notorious at taking verses out of context in order to make a point, therefore I
would suggest to you that the very first thing we must look at is the CONTEXT
of the quote. <b>Secondly, we must see if there is any contradiction with established Scripture and the text</b>; often times, Protestants who have little to no knowledge of Christian history are quick to accept a teaching offered by an Early Church Father that parallels their personal ideology but, rarely do Protestants go beyond a quote and a verse - and in doing so, they misinterpret what the Early Church Father said.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">St. Irenaeus wrote the third book of <i>Against Heresies</i> in the late 2<sup>nd</sup>
Century, it therefore should automatically behoove us to know what the first 2
books were about and how it is that they tie into the third. If one were to
read the first book of <i>Against Heresies</i>, one would realize that St. Irenaeus
sets out to debunk Gnosticism and, in the first book, he tends to illustrate
the absurdity of Gnosticim by briefly remarking on how Gnosticism makes no
practical sense and then demonstrating how only true Christianity confirms the
truth that they oppose. In the Second book, Irenaeus goes back and instead of
giving brief retorts to Gnostic heresies, he goes into great depth at fully
discrediting them, this all leads up to the third book which begins by delving
into doctrine more directly. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">As you can see, there is a method to St. Irenaeus’
madness as he starts off with simple retorts in order to set up a much larger
blitz against Gnosticism. This is the mindset that we MUST have in order to
fully understand St. Irenaeus as he begins his third book. This first paragraph is entitled:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">“The
apostles did not commence to preach the Gospel, or to place anything on record
until they were endowed with the gifts and power of the Holy Spirit. They
preached one God alone, Maker of heaven and earth.”<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Easily seen is that St. Irenaeus is going to talk about
how, through the power of the Holy Spirit, the Apostles were able to preach the
Gospel. This has <u>NOTHING</u> to do Sola Scriptura and everything to do with demonstrating to the Gnostics that there is only one God! In other words, the quote from up top that Protestants use to demonstrate <i>sola scriptura</i> - when taken IN CONTEXT - is NOT being used to prove <i>sola scriptura</i>! </span><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">Additionally, any
Protestant that dares to misquote St. Irenaeus here is unwittingly legitimizing
the Catholic doctrine of Oral Tradition! Because, after all, it was through the
oral preaching of the Apostles and their disciples that the early Church was
able to understand who Jesus was and how He came to offer mankind salvation as
well as how he was to be worshipped.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Without going too much into it, the Catholic Church has
always maintained that the Magisterium (“office of the teachers”) was started
by the 11 Apostles when Christ commissioned them to go and preach and baptize
in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2028:16-20&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew
28:16-20</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">. When Christ Ascended into heaven, he left the
Apostles the power to teach with authority but, more importantly, they could
not err since they would always have Jesus with them, “until the end of time.”
Hence, when the Apostles taught and spoke on matters of faith they were
preserved from ever teaching something wrong because God Himself was there with
them. We also see this again in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+14%3A26&version=NIV"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John
14:26</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, when Jesus promises His Apostles that they will remember
all that He has taught them through the power of the Holy Spirit. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">This Magisterial body of the Apostles had the authority
to determine what was right and what was heretical by virtue of being
established by Christ Himself and, this same body of Christ’s disciples, continues
to this day within the confines of the Catholic Church – the only Christian
church that can date itself to the time of Christ and, the only Christian
church that can undoubtedly state that it was founded by St. Peter, the Head
Apostle. As Catholics, we see the Magisterium, not only as one of our 3
sources of authority but, as a conduit for the living word of God to flow from; this
teaching is wholly absent in Protestantism since no non-Catholic denomination can
claim such a thing, as such we as Catholics see the teaching of the Magisterium
as unerring since it is in fact inspired by God…in the same way that the Bible
is.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">And, it is this very thing that St. Irenaeus is
attempting to demonstrate! As stated earlier, the third book of his <i>Against Heresies</i> goes into
Church doctrine and, as we take a closer look at what the first paragraph
states, we see that Irenaeus is attempting to make evident that only the
authority of the Apostles – as it was given to them by Christ and is handed
down via succession – is a doctrine of Christ’s true church! Let’s read a
little bit more of St. Irenaeus’ commentary and see just how the Protestant
tends to neuter his words for their benefit:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“…<span style="background: white;">For it is unlawful to assert that they preached before
they possessed perfect knowledge, as some do even venture to say…</span></span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif";"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">For, after our<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Lord<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>rose
from the dead, [the apostles</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">] were invested with
power from on high when the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Holy
Spirit</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">came down [upon them], were filled from all [His<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>gifts], and had<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>perfect </span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">knowledge</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">: they departed to
the ends of the earth, preaching the glad tidings of the good</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">things [sent] from<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>God<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>to us, and proclaiming the peace of<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>heaven<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>to men.</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">..”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Here Irenaeus is stating that the
deposit of faith given to the Apostles was perfect because the Holy Spirit
imparted to them all the adequate knowledge that they needed. He then goes on
to say that the true written Gospels come only from the 4 Evangelists:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“Matthew also issued a written<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Gospel</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">among the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Hebrews<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>in their own dialect…Mark, the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">disciple</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">and interpreter of<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Peter,
did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Peter.<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Luke<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>also,
the companion of<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Paul</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, recorded in a book
the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Gospel</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">preached by him. Afterwards,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>John, the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">disciple</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">of the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Lord,
who also had leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">during his residence at<span class="apple-converted-space"> Ephesus</span></span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">in<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Asia.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Now, I know what you’re going to say.
You’re going to say: “See! There’s proof right there that Irenaeus used
Scripture in order to prove his point! So Scripture is indeed the end-all for
the true Christian!” Well, if in fact you hold to this opinion, then let us continue
to the 2<sup>nd</sup> chapter of Book 3 and see what St. Irenaeus says about
Scripture; like I said before, ALL of this must be read in CONTEXT and not
piecemeal. In the continuing chapter, we see that Irenaeus decided to entitle
it:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 11.5pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">“The
heretics follow neither Scripture nor tradition”<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">Whoa! St. Irenaeus wouldn’t be equating tradition with Scripture now,
would he? Well, in the </span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103302.htm"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">2<sup>nd</sup> paragraph
of Chapter 2</span></span></a><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-style: italic; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;"> we read the following:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“…when we refer them to that<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>tradition<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>which originates from the apostles</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, [and] which is
preserved by means of the succession of<span class="apple-converted-space"> presbyters</span></span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">in the Churches</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, they object to tradition<span style="background: white;">…”<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Uh oh. There’s that distinctly
Catholic word, “succession” and even more Catholic, it speaks about succession
of priests in the Church as they hold on to tradition. Here it is unambiguously
stated that tradition, which the Gnostics (and to a greater extent modern-day
Protestants) reject, is needed in order to justify the authority of the
Scriptures and, it is precisely this tradition which dictates what is and is not
bone fided Holy Writ. This is very important for 2 reasons: one, it
demonstrates that the Scriptures came from tradition, that is, oral Tradition
validated the written Word and not vice-versa. Two, it shows that in the Early
Church, no set of Scriptures were needed due to the fact that the Apostles and
their successors had the unerring ability to preach orally inspired messages
when they spoke and, it was this unerring oral message that eventually was
written down and formed Holy Writ.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">In the continuing chapter, </span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">chapter
3 of Book 3</span></span></a><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, St. Irenaeus pulls no
punches in stating that succession from the Apostles is of the utmost
importance. He states:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“It is within the power of all, therefore, in every<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Church</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, who may wish to see
the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">truth</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, to<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>contemplate<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>clearly the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>tradition of the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">apostles</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a
position to reckon up those who were by the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">apostles</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> <span style="background: white;">instituted<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">bishops</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">in the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Churches</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, and [to
demonstrate] the succession of these<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>men<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>to our own times… [we do this, I say,]
by indicating that<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>tradition<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>derived from the </span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">apostles</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, of the very great,
the very ancient, and universally </span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">known</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Church</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">founded and organized at<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Rome</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">by the two most </span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">glorious</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">apostles</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Peter<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>and<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Paul</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">; as also [by
pointing out] the </span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">faith</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">preached to<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">men</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, which comes down to
our<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>time<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>by means of the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>successions<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>of the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">bishops</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">. For it is a<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>matter<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>of necessity<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>that every<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Church</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">should agree with this<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Church</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, on account of its
preeminent authority,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>that is,
the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>faithful everywhere,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>inasmuch as the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">tradition<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>has been preserved continuously by
those [faithful<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>men] who<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>exist<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>everywhere.</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">St. Irenaeus then goes on to mention the 3 Popes who
came after St. Peter:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">“</span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">The<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>blessed<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">apostles</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, then, having
founded and built up the </span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Church</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, committed into the
hands of<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Linus<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>the office of the </span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">episcopate</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">. Of this<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Linus,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Paul</span></i><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">makes mention in the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Epistles<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>to Timothy. To him succeeded<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Anacletus; and after him, in the third
place from the<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">apostles</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">,<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Clement<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>was allotted the </span></i><i><span style="background: white; color: windowtext; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">bishopric</span></i><i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">…”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">That’s right, the man named </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Timothy%204:21&version=KJV"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Linus mentioned in 2 Timothy 4:21</span></span></a><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> would eventually become </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Linus"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">the
second leader of the Catholic Church</span></span></a><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, i.e.,
the Pope. And the man mentioned in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Philippians%204:2-3&version=KJV"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Philippians 4:2-3</span></span></a><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">,
Clement, would become </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Clement_I"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">the 4th
Pope to lead the Catholic Church</span></span></a><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">! In
other words, 3 of the first 4 men who would become the Bishop of Rome are
mentioned in Scripture! Now, why am I stressing this so much? Well, plainly
stated, if in fact one wants to equate <i>sola
scriptura</i> to St. Ireneaus based on the aforementioned quote then why not
also accept the fact that St. Ireneaus strictly observed and defended the
succession of Popes who led the Church that he belonged to? <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Indeed, to accept Ireneaus as an
authority for the validity of sola scriptura is to accept Irenaeus as an
authority for the Catholic doctrine of tradition and succession of Popes. To
not accept both and merely the former is to dishonestly attempt to prove that St.
Irenaeus believed in the Bible alone and not the tenements of Catholicism! <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Lastly, we must also point out that –
if a Protestant wants to take St. Ireneaus’ quote as vindication for using
Scripture alone, they themselves are actually going against what the Bible
teaches. In the last line of St. Irenaeus’ quote, he says that Scripture was
“handed down to us” and that the Scriptures are to be “the ground and pillar of
our faith.” The pro-sola scriptura Protestant will immediately pounce on this
notion however, what St. Irenaeus has just stated is at odds with what Scripture
itself states. 1 Timothy 3:15 states:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">“But if I should be delayed, you should know how
to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the
pillar and foundation of truth.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">So now we have a
contradiction. On the one hand, <i>sola
scriptura</i> believers will say that Irenaeus is proof that the Early Church
recognized Scripture as being the “ground and pillar” of the Christian faith.
But, on the other hand, Scripture explicitly dictates that the Church is the “pillar and foundation of truth.” So, which is it? A man states
that Scripture is the basis and yet Scripture commends the truth to the Church!
The only way to reconcile these is to accept the fact that St. Irenaeus did
this on purpose in order to equate the Church, which was founded upon Peter and
lives through the succession of leaders, with the Scriptures which were born
from the Apostolic Traditions. Basically, the only way to square this apparent
contradiction is to accept the Catholic position!<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><b><u>BONUS POINT OF TRUTH:</u></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">If any Protestant wants to use this quote by St. Ireneaus, remember the Catholic teaching of orally inspired teaching because, after all, Irenaeus explicitly says that the Gospels was "at one time" proclaimed in public BEFORE it was written down! This gives firm proof that oral teaching was a basis for determining what was and was not inspired Scripture.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">"This seal have thou ever on thy mind; which now by way of
summary has been touched on in its heads, and if the Lord grant, shall
hereafter be set forth according to our power, with Scripture proofs.<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>For concerning the divine and sacred Mysteries of the Faith, we ought not
to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor
be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then
believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy
Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our
faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures. </span></b><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">– </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207.ii.viii.html"><span style="font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">St.
Cyril of Jerusalem, <i>Catechetical Lectures</i> 4, paragraph 17</span></span></a><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">This is one of the often used verses from
St. Cyril’s <i>Catechetical Lectures</i> that
Protestants use to showcase an Early Church Father as being a Bible only
believing Christian. Cyril’s 4<sup>th</sup> Lecture is specifically geared
toward addressing 10 different points of doctrine and, it is while talking upon
the aspects of the Holy Spirit that St. Cyril makes the statement which sounds
distinctly pro-sola scriptura. In CONTEXT, it is obvious that Cyril holds that
Scripture is Holy Writ due to the fact that it came from the Prophets via the
Holy Spirit. However, it is when we ask ourselves, “what are the Scriptures
that Cyril speaks of?” that the Protestant desire of a sola scriptura Early
Church Father comes crashing down.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">One need only continue on to the 33
paragraph of Cyril’s 4<sup>th</sup> Catechetical Lecture to see that St. Cyril
addresses the Divine Scriptures. In paragraph 33, we also find another
Protestant favorite line, see if you can spot it. In paragraph 33 we read:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">“Learn also diligently, and from the Church, what are the books of
the Old Testament, and what those of the New. And pray, read none of the
apocryphal writings: for why dost thou, who knowest not those which are
acknowledged among all, trouble thyself in vain about those which are disputed?...”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">This would be a dagger to any Catholic!
Here we have an Early Church Father stating that we are to read the Bible and
not the apocryphal (deuterocanonicals) books that we Catholics have in our
Bibles! But, fret not my dear reader for what Cyril says next is even more
shocking (<b>my emphasis</b> added):<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">“Read the Divine Scriptures, <b>the twenty-two books of the Old Testament</b>, these that have been
translated by the 72 interpreters...of these <b>read the two and twenty books</b>, but have nothing to do with the
apocryphal writings…strive to remember them by name as I recite them. For the
Law the books of Moses are the first five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers,
Deuteronomy. And next Joshua the son of Nave, and the book of Judges including
Ruth, counted as seventh. And of the other historical books, the first and
second books of the Kings are among the Hebrews one book; also the third and
fourth book…the first and second Chronicles are with them one book; and the
first and second Esdras are counted as one. Esther is the twelfth book…Job and
the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, which
is the seventeenth book…Isaiah…Jeremiah…including Baruch and Lamentations and
the Epistle; then Ezekiel, and the Book of Daniel, <b>the twenty-second of the Old Testament.</b>” <o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">And now the Protestant
proponent of St. Cyril as being a <i>sola
scriptura</i> believer has a dilemma: If the Protestant Bible contains 39 books
in the Old Testament how is it that St. Cyril, the ancient authority that is
being used to demonstrate sola scriptura, only mentioned that there are ONLY 22
books? What happened to the other 17 books found in the Protestant bibles?
Additionally, if a Protestant wants to make the charge that St. Cyril said we
shouldn’t read the apocryphal books, then why did he mention the </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Baruch"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Book of
Baruch</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"> in his list of Old
Testament books? Go ahead, ask any Protestant to turn to the Baruch and they’ll
never be able to find it, why? Because this is one of the 7 apocryphal books
that Martin Luther discarded when he compiled his abridged bible; the very same
abridged bible used by Protestants today! Plus, St. Cyril never mentions the
Book of Revelation in his list of New Testament books in paragraph 36 of <i>Lecture 4</i>!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">So, it is quite clear then
that there is a contradiction here: on the one hand, Protestants claim that St.
Cyril was a sola scriptura adherent. But, on the other hand, the Old Testament
list of books that St. Cyril describes is missing over 40% of the current books
found in the Old Testament and one book out of the New Testament! So, how can we resolve this set of differences?
Again, the only solution is the Catholic solution. In order to bring harmony to
this dispute we must accept the fact that the Bible, as it is in its current
form, had not yet been fully compiled nor canonized. It would be almost another
90 years from the time of St. Cyril that Scripture would be officially
canonized at the Council of Rome in 382 A.D. by Pope Damasus I. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">Therefore, the list of
Scriptures that Cyril had was, for all intents and purposes, a working canon at
the time and, there is no doubt that, had Cyril lived after the canonization of
Scripture, he too would’ve accepted ALL of the 73 books of the Bible as it was
put forward by the authority of the Catholic Church.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">St. Cyril’s Catechetical
Lectures are some of the most cited of all the Early Church Father’s for
attempted proof of the doctrine of <i>sola
scriptura</i>. In </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207.ii.ix.html"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Lecture 5.12</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">, the sola scriptura dogmatist will state that Cyril mentions how the
faith came to be fully known via the Church and from the Scriptures. However,
what most don’t realize is that St. Cyril, in the same paragraph goes on to
describe the Nicene Creed - <u>a distinctly Catholic Creedo</u> - and how important it as a part of our faith! We see
St. Cyril continue to defend the Nicene Creed and it’s Scriptural origin again in </span><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207.ii.xvii.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Lecture 13.8-9</span></a> </span>(proves that Scripture backs up orally inspired tradition)</span><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">, as well as </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207.ii.xix.html"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Lecture 15.13</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"> (proves that the Church played a crucial role in authoritative
interpretation) and, in </span><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207.ii.xx.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Lecture 16.2</span></a> </span>(which proves the existence of the Holy Spirit)</span><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">. If nothing else, this lends justification to the Catholic use of the
Nicene Creed in all of our Masses as well as the wholly Catholic doctrine of the Trinity.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">In </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207.ii.xvi.html"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Verdana","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Lecture 12.5</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">, many a <i>sola scriptura</i>
upholder will note at how St. Cyril says that one should not believe the
testimony of man unless it came from the Scriptures. However, this <i>Lecture</i> is
dedicated to the Incarnation of Christ and, IN CONTEXT, St. Cyril is stating
that if one does not believe in the Virgin birth, that they should check and
see the prophesies of the Old Testament; IN CONTEXT, this has nothing to do
with the bible being the sole authority for all things Christian and has everything to do with how the Christ was to be born of a virgin.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;">The one thing that must be remembered in all of the various Lectures of Cyril is that he NEVER states the supremacy or superiority of Scripture over the Church and Tradition. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%;"><b><u>BONUS POINT OF TRUTH:</u></b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">If any non-Catholic Christian wants to attempt to use St. Cyril of Jerusalem as an authoritative figure who believed in <i>sola scriptura</i>, ask them what do they think about St. Cyril's <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207.ii.xxvii.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">23rd<i> Lecture</i></span></a>, entitled <i>"On the Sacred Liturgy and Communion." </i>In this fairly short Lecture written in the late 300's, Cyril clearly demonstrates that the Church had a liturgy which parallels the Catholic Mass! Indeed, IT IS THE MASS! Or, ask them to read St. Cyril's <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf207.ii.xxvi.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">22nd <i>Lecture</i></span></a> in which he undeniably states that Jesus Christ is really present in the Eucharist!</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
End of Part 1</div>
<br />Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-66630598096993275752013-05-20T10:44:00.001-04:002013-05-20T10:44:32.386-04:00Sorry for the long hiatus!Sorry for the lack of new post over the last couple of weeks but, between having a pregnant wife, having surgery and, preparing for my Confirmation class's actual confirmation, I've been to busy to share my thoughts and feelings on all of the stuff that has been going on within the faith.<br />
<br />
I will try to get some posts that I've been working on up and running by the end of the week if not by early next week.Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-91687862223221900232013-03-26T17:17:00.002-04:002013-03-26T17:17:59.559-04:00The Good Thief and Catholic TeachingEvery good Christian has heard the biblical account of the Good Thief, the bandit who, along with a cohort, were both crucified with Christ, and every good Protestant will quickly use the story of the Good Thief in order to demonstrate holes in Catholic theology and dogma. The Protestant will usually start out by asking a Catholic the following question:<br />
<br />
<b>Protestant:</b> "Is it true that you Catholics believe that baptism saves you?"<br />
<b>Catholic:</b> "Yes, we do believe it does."<br />
<b>Protestant:</b> "Don't you Catholics also believe that your works can get you into heaven?"<br />
<b>Catholic:</b> "While works do help, it is God's Grace that merits the eternal reward."<br />
<b>Protestant:</b> "Then how is it that the thief that was crucified along with Christ was, according to <a href="http://wwwdev.bibleshark.com/bible/KJV/Luke/23/42-43/" target="_blank">Luke 23:42-43</a>, going to be in Paradise with Jesus if he never was baptized nor did he do any good works as a thief?"<br />
<br />
Here we see an attack at two basic dogmas of the Catholic Church, the Sacrament of Baptism is called into question as well as the concept of Justification, that is, how are we justified as righteous and holy enough to truly be called the sons and daughters of God? While the subject of Justification deserves its own post, and I WON'T be going in to that in this post, the bigger subject is the following: How can a Catholic respond to this accusation?<br />
<br />
The reason why I bring this topic up is because yesterday was the feast day of Saint Dismas, b.k.a., "The Good Thief." While his name is never stated in the bible, the apocryphal 4th century work entitled <i><a href="http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/gospelnicodemus.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">The Gospel of Nicodemus</span></a></i>, states in the 10th chapter that the name of the penitent thief was "Dysmas" and the non-penitent malefactor was named "Gestas." What is mentioned in Scripture, however, is what we will be looking at.<br />
<br />
In <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PX6.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke 23:39-43</span></a> we read the following:<br />
<br />
<i>Now one of the criminals hanging there reviled Jesus, saying, "Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us." The other, however, rebuking him, said in reply, "Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same condemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we received corresponds to our crimes, but this man had done nothing criminal." Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." The replied to him, "Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise."</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Hanging there on the cross, he finally saw himself as a sinner, so he was able to admonish the other thief as an evildoer. He also saw that, as a sinner, he needed healing so he confessed his sin and - with his heart stirring toward righteousness - he bore witness to the false conviction of an innocent man, that being, Jesus. And lastly, he realized who really was next to him, that right there in his agony stood none other than God Himself.<br />
<br />
This closer examination reveals that the Good Thief did 3 things, that is, he did 3 works:<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>#1: </b>The Good Thief <u>rebuked a sinner</u>, namely the other thief.<br />
<b>#2:</b> The Good Thief <u>gave a confession</u>.<br />
<b>#3:</b> The Good Thief <u>acknowledged Christ as the Messiah</u>.<br />
<br />
What we need to realize is that,<span style="color: #3d85c6;"> <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2016:17&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">much like St. Peter</span></a></span>, it wasn't his human heart that realized the truth of Christ but it was through the work of God the Father. Essentially, it was the Grace of God that first provoked the Good Thief as he anguished and united his cross with that of Jesus. Filled with this grace, as well as a new faith in God, he was awakened; this all led the Good Thief, Dismas, to put his new found faith into action and into works.<br />
<br />
This is an excellent example of the much larger Catholic teaching on Justification which essentially states that God freely gives you Grace, which in turn leads you to have faith and, after you have faith in the one and only God, it is up to you to put that faith into action. After all, can a person who is filled with the grace of God and has faith in Him simply lock themselves up in a room and expect to be a good Christian? Or, is a person who has been blessed by His grace and has fervent fealty to Him supposed to go out and evangelize and proclaim His message? It is only in this Catholic understanding that <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%202:14-17&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">James 2:14-17</span></a> can make any sense.<br />
<br />
As for the Good Thief not being baptized, CCC# 1259-1260 state explicitly the Catholic belief in a Baptism of Desire, therefore, had the Good Thief of had the opportunity to have been baptized, it is almost certain that he would have.<br />
<br />
Lastly, as a personal thought, I would like to state my personal opinion about the Good Thief. For me, it means that it is never too late to come to know who God is and what he wants you to do for him in your life. For Dismas, this meant the he would be the archetype for such a belief but, for us, it can mean much more. And indeed it does mean much more, for unlike the Good Thief, we already know who Jesus is and what he did and to not take that gift of knowledge and put it to use in our own lives is truly wasteful and insulting to God.<br />
<br />
To think, if we only had half of the faith that the Good Thief had as he hung next to Christ...what miracles we could achieve! Saint Dismas, pray for us!<br />
<br />
<br />Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-22292620278081530262013-03-13T16:00:00.003-04:002013-03-14T09:06:58.492-04:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEid6Jy97KHjrEa0eKW6ayG1w6Y5JY0oP9MD_4DDIAv0jVq3SPiyNglZqD5b-fSc_lZ3EXeZ1webghi7-PhKPNQT5UfAMBnQXU-hn7plQYvSyXOKh_AbeS_tR2y7NwFLXelQTn9x4Dcuqco/s1600/Habemus+Papam.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEid6Jy97KHjrEa0eKW6ayG1w6Y5JY0oP9MD_4DDIAv0jVq3SPiyNglZqD5b-fSc_lZ3EXeZ1webghi7-PhKPNQT5UfAMBnQXU-hn7plQYvSyXOKh_AbeS_tR2y7NwFLXelQTn9x4Dcuqco/s400/Habemus+Papam.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>Let us all pray for our new Pope:</b><br />
<br />
<div style="background-color: white; color: #444444; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', HelveticaNeue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-top: 10px; outline: none 0px;">
<b>V</b>. Let us pray for <strong style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline: none 0px;">Francis</strong>, our Pope.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #444444; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', HelveticaNeue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-top: 10px; outline: none 0px;">
<b>R</b>. May the Lord preserve him, and give him life, and make him blessed upon the earth, and deliver him not up to the will of his enemies. (Ps 40:3)</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #444444; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', HelveticaNeue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-top: 10px; outline: none 0px;">
Our Father, Hail Mary</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #444444; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', HelveticaNeue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: -5px; margin-top: 10px; outline: none 0px;">
O God, Shepherd and Ruler of all Thy faithful people, look mercifully upon Thy servant <strong style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; outline: none 0px;">Francis I</strong>, whom Thou hast chosen as shepherd to preside over Thy Church. Grant him, we beseech Thee, that by his word and example, he may edify those over whom he hath charge, so that together with the flock committed to him, may he attain everlasting life. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.</div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-28276057789312952182013-02-20T12:56:00.003-05:002013-02-21T13:16:32.326-05:00Schismatics dream of a Pope for heretical idealsIn my <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2013/02/pope-benedict-xvi-and-4-cups.html" target="_blank">last post</a> I spoke at length about how Pope Benedict XVI's decision to freely resign of his own volition is totally reconcilable with Scripture as well as <a href="http://www.ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/what-is-the-history-behind-papal-resignations" target="_blank">Tradition</a>, as such we as faithful Catholics relegate the decision of the next man to occupy the Throne of St. Peter to the will of God working through the hearts and minds of the Cardinals.<br />
<br />
There are, however, millions upon millions of people who would much rather entrust the election of the next Pope, not to the will of God nor the eminent power of the Holy Spirit but, they would rather the next Pope be selected based on worldly whim and "progressive" attitudes. Unfortunately, these are two attributes that not only go against the truth that is revealed in Christ but, are blatantly and shamelessly at odds with who God - in His eternal majesty - is; there is no profane caprice in God's nature and there is most certainly no "changing of the mind" for God either, for if the latter were even possible then each and every shred of evidence working in favor of the Christian faith would candidly be up for debate and would totally undermine any conviction in God.<br />
<br />
But, perhaps, that is exactly what anti-Catholics are attempting to do and there is no better example than <a href="http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130215/OPINION03/302150311/Wanted-pope-who-looks-ahead-not-backward?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|s" target="_blank">this recent article</a> I stumbled upon whilst perusing the intertubez. Entitled, <i>"Wanted: A pope who looks ahead, not backward" </i>the author of this opinion piece, Marney Rich Keenan, makes a desperate plea (to the cardinals? to dissenting "c"atholics?) that what the Catholic Church needs is a "forward thinking" Pope that will undo all of the old and stuffy traditions of the Church and usher her into a new era. Again, if the Catholic Church is in fact Christ's one and only Church, then by her divine origin IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR HER TO CHANGE for God never changes (see <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2013:8&version=DRA" target="_blank">Hebrews 13:8</a>).<br />
<br />
As such, it therefore behooves me to tear apart this straw-man argument in order to demonstrate that this author has no idea of a) basic Catholic beliefs, b) basic Catholic dogma, c) Church history d) has never read any major Papal encyclicals and e) should do some simple research before expressing her opinion; that last point also applies to all "c"atholics who share in her wrongfully conceived conclusion. <u>NOTE</u>: I will not reproduce all of the article here, I will only address major errors, please read the article first.<br />
<br />
<b><i>"Most likely, the lack of discussion on what we'd like to see in a new pope is a reflection of our powerlessness over the process. Indeed, the choosing of the new pope is a centuries-old ritual, cloaked in secrecy during which the College of Cardinals, a group of about 120 cassock-wearing, accomplished church politicians burn ballots and send smoke signals..."</i></b><br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
Time and time again, we always hear the same thing from the schismatics: <i>"If only we had some input as to who gets to be pastor!"</i> This is not only a repudiation of the Holy Spirit working at the local parish level but it is also an explicit statement in favor of a "Christ-my-way" protestanized form of Christianity! The "c"atholics who advocate that the laity should have part as to who the shepherd should be are usually the ones who have huge disagreements with basic Catholic theology, therefore, Ms. Rich Keenan, to suggest that we are "powerless" over this process is to state that we are somehow better suited to understand the fullness of our faith better than the men who were <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%2015:16&version=RSVCE" target="_blank">called by Christ to do so</a>. See <a href="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_22021996_universi-dominici-gregis_en.html" target="_blank"><i>Universi Dominici Gregis</i></a> for more info on why the College of Cardinals is of importance in selecting a Pope.<br />
<br />
Additionally, you are in error in stating that we are "powerless" in this process. As the faithful laity, we are to unite our prayers with the will of God and ask that a new and faithful servant may serve as the Bishop of Rome. To say that we are powerless when we have God on our side, is to refuse Christ's sacrifice and denounce the only Church that He established but, then again, isn't that exactly what you are intent on doing?<br />
<br />
Moreover, to state that the College of Cardinals are a group of "church politicians" is wholly absurd because the Roman Catholic Church IS NOT nor will it ever be a democracy, period. Either you believe that the Church is guided by God or not, it's really just that simple. Again, this is the drivel of an angry heretic who wishes to undo Holy Mother Church's teachings for contemporary indulgences.<br />
<br />
<b><i>Wouldn't it be wonderful if the new pope could strike a balance between tradition and modernism?...rather than advocate a smaller church with more ardent believers, opened the church to more people by being relevant. What about a pope who loosened all those Thou Shalt Nots (like reversing its position on contraception) and broadened the church's appeal?.</i></b><br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
Let's first talk about modernism, this is what modernism really does:<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzS9hXJi0p3EJNOlcCMa0yX-9K4D-1BQ18W30F5XYy7lzOxkxtzdrMi8qe0za5N7wbpbaHeKcu-2h6ucefsXZp8nvPNYI5XAbZaL5ycSHRzOjvRBCxbZELsA-EN9Xr54pGe-DuwBmKaBU/s1600/Descent_of_the_Modernists,_E._J._Pace,_Christian_Cartoons,_1922.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="391" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzS9hXJi0p3EJNOlcCMa0yX-9K4D-1BQ18W30F5XYy7lzOxkxtzdrMi8qe0za5N7wbpbaHeKcu-2h6ucefsXZp8nvPNYI5XAbZaL5ycSHRzOjvRBCxbZELsA-EN9Xr54pGe-DuwBmKaBU/s400/Descent_of_the_Modernists,_E._J._Pace,_Christian_Cartoons,_1922.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
Had Ms. Rich Keenan have gone back about 100 years, she would've easily have come upon Pope Saint Pius X's encyclical <i><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10pasce.htm" target="_blank">Pascendi Domini Gregis</a></i>. In this encyclical Pope Pius X teaches us the following about the modernists in paragraph 13:<br />
<br />
<i>Blind that they are, and leaders of the blind, inflated with a boastful science, they have reached that pitch of folly where they pervert the eternal concept of truth and the true nature of the religious sentiment; with that new system of theirs they are seen to be under the sway of a blind and unchecked passion for novelty, thinking not at all of finding some solid foundation of truth, but despising the holy and apostolic traditions, they embrace other vain, futile, uncertain doctrines, condemned by the Church, on which, in the height of their vanity they think they can rest and maintain truth itself.</i><br />
<br />
Indeed, Pope St. Pius X argues, quite masterfully, that <b style="text-decoration: underline;">MODERNISM IS A HERESY</b>! It is a heresy because it does away with an all important source of authority, that is, tradition, and, in doing so, it also strikes at Divine Revelation by rejecting the Deposit of Faith instilled by Christ. Had Ms. Rich Keenan have done any form of critical research she would've noted that just 2 months before <i>Pascendi Domini Gregis</i> was issued, Pope Saint Pius X published a syllabus that contained 65 errors of mondernism called <i><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10lamen.htm" target="_blank">Lamentabili Sane</a></i>. If Ms. Rich had wanted to form a rational opinion, she could've also have looked to St. Pius X's predecessor, Pope Leo XIII, who wrote at length in his encyclical <i><a href="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18111893_providentissimus-deus_en.html" target="_blank">Providentissimus Deus</a> </i>about the errors of modernist thought when interpreting Holy Scripture. If Ms. Rich Keenan had wanted to, she could've also have studied an encyclical by Pope Leo XIII's predecessor, Blessed Pope Pius IX, entitled <i><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9syll.htm" target="_blank">Syllabus of Errors</a></i>, which also detailed 80 different errors, including modernism. Indeed, had the author of this hit piece have done ANY investigative analysis, she would've come to the fact that, by advocating for a modernist Pope, she is in fact advocating for a heretical Papacy. Let it be thoroughly clear: Modernism is a heresy; as Pope St. Pius X put it in <i>Pascendi</i> paragraph 39 (<b>my emphasis</b>):<br />
<br />
<i>We have had to give this exposition a somewhat didactic form and not to shrink from employing certain uncouth terms in use among the Modernists. And now, can anybody who takes a survey of the whole system be surprised that We should define it as the <b>synthesis of all heresies</b>?</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Ms. Rich Keenan also states a preposterous notion that the next Pope should open up the church by making it "more relevant" as well as doing away with the Church's teachings against the evils of contraception as a way to "broaden the appeal" of the Church to more people. No other passage of Scripture best summarizes just how wrong she is than the <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+16%3A19-31&version=NIV" target="_blank">Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus</a>. In it, the rich man and Lazarus both die and the poor man, Lazarus, makes it to <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01055a.htm" target="_blank">Abraham's Bosom</a> while the rich man - who had everything - is sentenced into eternal torment. From the depths of hell, the rich man cries out to Abraham and the following exchange occurs in Luke 16:27-31:<br />
<br />
<i>..."Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment." Abraham replied, "They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them." </i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>"No, father Abraham," he said, "but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent." Abraham said to him, "If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead."</i><br />
<br />
To Ms. Rich Keenan, I say the following: if people, by their own free will, choose to ignore the truth then, as clearly stated in Scripture, not even Jesus Christ being risen from the dead will change their mind! Their hearts are so closed to the truth that the only way they can accept it is on their own terms and not God's. A more utterly selfish way of ostracizing God from your life, there is not.<br />
<br />
<b><i>What if we had a pope who struggled to pay his own bills, who understood that most couples live together before marriage, a pope whose son was bullied because he was gay or whose teenage daughter got pregnant?...</i></b><br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
"A pope who struggles to pays his own bills?" Ms. Rich Keenan, do you happen to know what the average median income for a priest is? By all accounts the national average is the <a href="http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes212011.htm#top" target="_blank">same as</a> or <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/13/clergy-salaries-rabbis-priests-pastors-imams_n_1204870.html" target="_blank">lower than</a> the <a href="http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/economy/story/2012-02-09/income-rising/53033322/1" target="_blank">average U.S. citizen's household income</a> and, with American households having issues paying bills, suffice it to say, that the same occurs with priests. Personally, the pastor at my parish revealed to my wife and I at dinner that he makes much less than $30,000 per year and he's been a priest for over 10 years! As for a pope understanding what a young gay man or a teenage girl has to go through, I can assure you that many faithful priests have helped young adults in these types of situations through the power of the confessional.<br />
<br />
A pregnant teenage girl will encounter a community of hope and charity if she simply submits to the grace of God in the Sacraments and to Church teaching or, she could go to a cold and sterile operating room and have the life within her body rip out of her. Is it any wonder why the Catholic Church is so hated for it's pro-life stance?<br />
<br />
Is it any wonder why the Catholic Church is so hated for it's apt treatment of homosexuality? The Church has always taught that homosexual acts - not the homosexual person - are grave offenses to God. The Church asks all people with homosexual tendencies to bind themselves to chastity and Christ's cross which is exactly the same thing it asks of all heterosexual people! The issue here is that homosexuality IS NOT EQUAL to heterosexuality, the Church makes that clear but, the Church also makes it clear that homosexuals are to be treated with dignity and respect because they too are children of God. In light of this truth, a priest can easily reassure a young gay man that he is loved by God and that God doesn't want him to sin and that he must take up his cross of homosexuality and bear it all for His love.<br />
<br />
As for cohabitation, <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P87.HTM" target="_blank">CCC #2931</a>, states it to be a nothing more than a "trial marriage" that not only corrupts what marriage is supposed to be but, it doesn't guarantee that a marriage will come from it, a fact that every secularist can attest to. As the last line in that paragraph so correctly puts it:<br />
<br />
<i>Human love does not tolerate "trial marriages." It demands a total and definitive gift of persons to one another</i>.<br />
<br />
One only need to look at other writings to see just why cohabitation is a waste of time and love, <i><a href="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html" target="_blank">Humane Vitae</a></i> explains just what evils await those who choose to cohabitate and contracept. Blessed Pope John Paul II addressed in 1981 the act of cohabitation in his work <i><a href="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio_en.html" target="_blank">Familiaris Consortio</a></i> (see paragraphs 81-84). Additionally when one reads <i>Familiaris</i> in light of Blessed Pope John Paul II <i>Theology of the Body</i>, cohabitation and pre-marital sex are strictly at odds with God's divine plan.<br />
<br />
<b><i>What if we had a pope who stopped marginalizing women, especially nuns...the nuns were accused of promoting "radical feminist themes" and engaging in corporate dissent against church teachings on contraception, homosexuality and the ordination of women.</i></b><br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
The Vatican speaking out against incredulist nuns does not mean that they are being marginalized. While the LCWR does represent close to 80% of all women religious, not all nuns fall into the heresy that some of the LCWR leadership has chosen to be a part of. The fact of the matter is that several of these nuns have chosen to go against Church teachings, and in doing so, have incurred the wrath of Rome...what a surprise. Let me ask you Ms. Rich Keenan, if you went against say, work policy at your job to the point of undermining your employer, would you think that when your boss found out he/she wouldn't have some choice words for you, even though you're doing a good job? This is exactly what these dissident nuns have put themselves in, they have abandoned the teachings and are in need of reprimand, plain and simple.<br />
<br />
I've done several posts on these dissident nuns, see <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/05/lastest-dissident-nun-needs-to-get-her.html" target="_blank">here</a>, <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/06/vatican-dissident-nuns-book-not-in.html" target="_blank">here</a>, <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/06/nuns-on-bus-nuns-for-heterodoxy-nuns.html" target="_blank">here</a>, <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/07/young-priest-lays-smack-down-on-lcwr.html" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/09/dissident-nun-at-democrat-national.html" target="_blank">here</a>.<br />
<br />
<i><b>I realize I'm suggesting that the pope, the human being Catholics consider to be the closest thing to God - Jesus' understudy - is wholly out of touch with Western culture...the pews continue to empty and priests are few and far between...</b></i><br />
<br />
We Catholics think that the Pope is "the closest thing to God?" That is such an imbecilic and theologically incompetent statement, that words escape me:<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwW2GfhCBOD7ByjjE4OfhzM17HgwvQy6N08RFOqkTPmaP7Utpl4k7gHZ_9IXv1SLq1us1eupVOewlXV675sze1j3915FaO28KlFTAymcV-H4DEi16pBtVuRxBCpyfWWyOXLf81Ak6GWSQ/s1600/Daniel__s_Facepalm_by_xAikaNoKurayami.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwW2GfhCBOD7ByjjE4OfhzM17HgwvQy6N08RFOqkTPmaP7Utpl4k7gHZ_9IXv1SLq1us1eupVOewlXV675sze1j3915FaO28KlFTAymcV-H4DEi16pBtVuRxBCpyfWWyOXLf81Ak6GWSQ/s400/Daniel__s_Facepalm_by_xAikaNoKurayami.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Words may escape me, but Ms. Rich Keenan's ignorance doesn't. Who let this woman opine on something she knows nothing about?<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Catholics <b><u>DO NOT</u></b> view the Pope as some sort of god-man or "Jesus' understudy," we see him as the successor to the Throne of Saint Peter and head of the Roman Catholic Church, that's it. There are certain perks that come with such a great responsibility but, to state that we view him as God on Earth is totally without any historical merit nor precedence. The Pope is a man, he is the leader of the Church and the visible head of the church much like our President is the representative of our nation.<br />
<br />
Please see <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P2A.HTM" target="_blank">CCC #880-887</a> lest someone else besides me think of you as a fool, thanks. As for a stagnant membership growth, in 2011, the Catholic Church in the U.S. <a href="http://www.ncccusa.org/news/110210yearbook2011.html" target="_blank">grew by .57%</a>, while U.S. seminaries are <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/05/us-seminarian-numbers-are-up-pope-had.html" target="_blank">continuing to show growth</a> for the religious vocation as well as <a href="http://www.speroforum.com/a/42113/Statistics-show-worldwide-increase-of-Catholics-and-Catholic-priests" target="_blank">worldwide</a>.<br />
<br />
<b><i>To be sure, the pope is not chosen by a majority of Catholics but by a hierarchy, locked in tradition and infinitely slow to change. But the faithful's idea of a suitable earthly leader shouldn't be a dream.</i></b><br />
<br />
"To be sure, the pope is not chosen by a majority of Catholics but by a hierarchy <span style="color: red;">who have been given the honor and grace bestowed by the Holy Spirit,</span> locked in tradition<span style="color: red;">, a tradition that is not only the oldest in all of Western civilization but also important since it is a source of Divine authority</span> and infinitely slow to change<span style="color: red;"> in the same way that all powerful God is infinite and never changes</span>. But the <strike>faithful's</strike> <span style="color: red;">heretics and schismatics </span>idea of a suitable earthly leader shouldn't be a dream, <span style="color: red;">it should be considered a nightmare. For when we give over the power of Papal selection to earthly men and not to God's will, only trouble will befall the Catholic Church. But, then again, maybe that's exactly what some people want.</span>"<br />
<b><br /></b>
There, I fixed it!<br />
<br />Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-41622337742156785072013-02-14T15:26:00.001-05:002013-02-14T15:26:30.187-05:00Pope Benedict XVI and the 4 cups: A theological defense of Pope Benedict's resignationThere has been a lot of hulabaloo about Pope Benedict the XVI's willful departure from Pontifical duty and most of this chatter has tended toward a negative view of the Pontiff's actions. There have not only been attacks from anti-Catholics, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/11/us-pope-resigns-liberals-idUSBRE91A14R20130211" target="_blank">heretics</a> and <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/the-pope/9862944/Popes-resignation-sparks-conspiracy-theories.html" target="_blank">conspiracists</a> but, <a href="http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/news/detail/articolo/wojtyla-wojtyla-wojtyla-22147/" target="_blank">from within the Church</a> as well. Indeed, a lot of people are still processing exactly what this all means and, in the upcoming weeks as Pope Benedict's resignation nears, there will be A LOT of both speculation and ill sentiment towards the office of the Pope by both Catholic and Protestants alike; one truly has to wonder why a sitting Pope wouldn't remain atop of St. Peter's throne until death? Why didn't Pope Benedict run the full course of his Papacy?<br />
<br />
In trying to answer this question, let us ask ourselves the proverbial question: "WWJD?"<br />
<br />
Would Jesus have ever given up? Would Jesus have known when it was "time to quit?" Did Jesus ever, by his own will, give up on an endeavor? Did Jesus ever concede? In trying to answer these questions we can easily flip through Scripture and pull out passages to demonstrate arguments for and against this supposition. However, if we take a deeper theological look at Jesus' Passion in light of the Passover, I think we can easily answer those questions as well as reconcile Pope Benedict XVI's personal decision to depart from the Papacy and, furthermore, we will prove it by illustrating a very pivotal moment during Christ's Passion.<br />
<br />
The Passover Feast has been celebrated by devout Jews for over 3,000 years. This fact relegates us as Christians to come to a better knowledge of Judaism due to the fact that Jesus Himself celebrated the Seder meal along with various other spiritual ceremonies that we modern-day disciples do not have the luxury to know from first-hand knowledge. In as much as the Passover Seder is concerned, we have to take into account at least two things:<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>1. The Passover is a covenant between God and his people.</b><br />
<br />
In Exodus 12:14 we read the following concerning the celebration of the Passover:<br />
<br />
<i>This day shall be a memorial feast for you, which all your generations shall celebrate with pilgrimage to the LORD, as a perpetual institution.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
And again ten verses later in Exodus 12:24, which states:<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>You shall observe this as a perpetual ordinance for yourselves and your descendants...</i><br />
<br />
To this day, the covenant feast of the Passover is still celebrated by all faithful Jews, it not only ties them all to a common heritage but, it also gives them a familial bond to God. So intense is this bond that God referred to the nation of Israel as "his firstborn son" in Exodus 4:22-23 when He tells Moses to go and confront pharaoh. Indeed the simple fact that God chose the Hebrews to be His own is reason enough for all Jews to celebrate!<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>2. The Passover Seder is a meal that commemorates the exodus of the Jews out of Egypt.</b><br />
<br />
As described in Exodus 12, the Passover meal entails a lot of specifics that the ancient Hebrews were to do so that the Angel of Death would literally "pass over" the homes of the faithful. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus%2012:3-9&version=NIV" target="_blank">Exodus 12:3-9</a> details exactly what the Jews were to do, among other things, it states that families were to acquire a year old unblemished lamb that was to be slaughtered at twilight. The lamb's blood was to be applied to the doorposts of the Israelite's homes with <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus%2012:22&version=NIV" target="_blank">a bunch of hyssop</a>, while the lamb itself was to be roasted and eaten with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. No part of the lamb was to be eaten the following day and any remains were to be burned, additionally, the Jews were to dress as if they were prepared to take flight.<br />
<br />
One thing that we must not forget is that the Passover meal is broken up into 4 parts. It is these 4 parts that are not only integral to Jesus' Passion but, to my argument as well. The Passover has 4 cups of wine that MUST BE drank in commemoration of the exodus of the Jews out of Egypt and, in drinking these 4 cups of wine, the Jews are reminded of God's 4 promises found in Exodus 6:6-7 (with <b>my emphasis</b>):<br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>"Therefore, say to the Israelites: I am the LORD. <b>I will free you</b> from the forced labor of the Egyptians and will <b>deliver you</b> from their slavery.<b> I will rescue you</b> by my outstretched arm and with mighty acts of judgment. <b>I will take you</b> as my own people, and you shall have me as your God. You will know that I, the LORD, am your God when I free you from the labor of the Egyptians."</i><br />
<br />
The structure of celebrating the Passover using the 4 cups is as follows:<br />
<br />
<u>The 1st cup</u> signifies the blessing of the festival day, it is called the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiddush" target="_blank">Kiddush</a> Cup; kiddush means <i>sanctification </i>in Hebrew. As God's first promise found in Exodus 6:6, this sanctification comes by God bringing the ancient Jews out from under the burden of the Egyptians.<br />
<br />
<u>The 2nd cup</u>, called the Cup of Plagues, signifies judgement. In this part, a young child usually asks the rabbi or eldest participant the following question, "why is tonight different from all other nights?" At which point <a href="http://www.chabad.org/holidays/passover/pesach_cdo/aid/1737/jewish/Maggid.htm" target="_blank">4 different questions are asked</a> and the story of the Jew's exodus out of Egypt is retold. The second half of Exodus 6:6 proclaims God's judgement via the 10 plagues He wrought upon Egypt which rid the Jews of Egyptian bondage. At the end of the 2nd stage of the Passover, all the participants sing <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%20113&version=NIV" target="_blank">Psalm 113</a> which is called "the Little Hallel" and drink from the second cup.<br />
<br />
<u>The 3rd cup</u> is called the Cup of Blessing. At this stage in the Passover, the actual meal is eaten and, as prescribed per Exodus 12, a roasted lamb, bitter herbs and unleavened bread are eaten. The lamb is to remind them of the sacrifical lamb that saved the ancient Jews and bitter herbs to recall the bitterness of bondage that the LORD God freed them from. After the final piece of unleavened bread (called the <a href="http://www.jewishawareness.org/the-significance-of-the-afikomen/" target="_blank">Afikoman</a>) is eaten, the celebrant of the feast concludes this part by passing around the third cup which beckons the faithful Jew to God's third promise of salvation when He said that He would redeem the Israelites with his "outstretched arm." Psalms 114-118 are then sung, these psalms collectively constitute what is called "the Great Hallel."<br />
<br />
<u>The 4 cup</u> is introduced after the singing of "the Great Hallel." This fourth cup signifies the joy that is to be had by praising the LORD God for His fulfillment of His fourth promise found in Exodus 6:7 and, that is, of making the Israelite nation His own. After this cup is drank, the rabbi or celebrant of the feast says the following phrase: "Tal telesti" which means "it is finished" or, "it is consummated." At this point the Passover Seder meal is officially over.<br />
<br />
These are the steps to observing a proper Passover meal and, of critical importance, is the fact that these are the steps that Christ did all his life up until His final Passover in the upper room with his Apostles. It is in His final Passover, i.e., the last supper, that we find Jesus doing something remarkably at odds with Jewish tradition, in Mark chapter 14 verses 22 through 25, we read the following:<br />
<br />
<i style="background-color: white;">While they were eating, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, and said, "Take it; this is my body." Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, and they all drank from it. He said to them, "This is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed for many. Amen, I say to you, I shall not drink again the fruit of the vine until the day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God." </i><br />
<i><br /></i>
Clearly then we see that Jesus is celebrating the Passover (see <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2014:12&version=NIV" target="_blank">Mk 14:12</a>) with His Apostles and, knowing now the 4 steps of the Passover, we can correctly conclude that Jesus and the Apostles are in the 3rd step of Passover since they are eating and a cup of wine gets passed around. Now, taken by itself this isn't anything out of the ordinary for a Jew to read or listen to BUT, it is what happens in Mark 14:26 that separates this Passover from all others. Mark 14 verse 26 says the following:<br />
<br />
<i><span style="background-color: white;">Then, after singing a hymn, </span><span style="background-color: white;">they went out to the Mount of Olives.</span></i><br />
<i><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></i>
So then, what do we have here? We have the end of the 3rd stage being completed because Scripture points out that they sang a hymn, that is, "the Great Hallel" and, after singing it they go out to the Mount of Olives. Now this may not seem odd or weird to us modern day Christians but to any Jewish reader of Mark's Gospel, they would seriously find issue with Jesus' actions, why? BECAUSE JESUS FAILED TO END THE PASSOVER MEAL! By not drinking the 4th cup, Jesus has unambiguously and definitely chosen not to end the Passover.<br />
<br />
This presumption is made all the more recognizable when Jesus, while praying in the Garden at Gethsemane, says the following in Mark 14:35-36,<br />
<br />
<i><span style="background-color: white;">He advanced a little and fell to the ground and prayed that if it were possible the hour might pass by him; </span><span style="background-color: white;">he said, "Abba, Father, </span><span style="background-color: white;">all things are possible to you. Take this cup away from me, but not what I will but what you will."</span></i><br />
<i><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></i>
<span style="background-color: white;">What cup is Jesus talking about if not the 4th cup? The 4th cup which will end the Passover and see the nation of God redeemed by a sacrifical lamb! This is what Jesus meant when he asked for "this cup to be taken away," Christ knew that when the Passover would end, so would His life. He knew that soon, he would be forced to take up His cross (literally) and be sacrificed for all; <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2022:42&version=NKJV" target="_blank">Luke 22:41-42</a> depicts the same scene in which we hear Jesus say:</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><i>"Father, if you are willing, take this cup away from me; still, not my will but yours be done."</i></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">How, you may ask, does any of this have to do with </span><span style="background-color: white;">our current Pope, Benedict XVI? Well, like I stated at the onset of this post, the real question is whether or not Jesus ever gave up. In the same manner that Christ carried His Cross, Benedict XVI has had to carry the huge burden of the Papacy upon his shoulders and the task that Joseph Ratzinger was given, was truly one of self-sacrifice for the honor of Christ's one true Church. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">So, did Jesus know when to give up? Yes, by all accounts he did. He gave Himself up when He knew that all that he was sent here to do had been fulfilled, the same as Pope Benedict XVI. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+15%3A23&version=NIV" target="_blank">Mark 15:23</a>, we see that Jesus has finally carried His cross to Golgotha and the Roman soldiers offer Him wine drugged with myrrh but, as the Scriptures dictates, he did not take it. Jesus had the opportunity at that point to end the Passover sacrifice only if He would've drank from that cup but, he suffered on. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2027:34&version=NKJV" target="_blank">Matthew 27:34</a> recounts the same information, it states:</span><br />
<br />
<i>...<span style="background-color: white;">they gave Jesus wine to drink mixed with gall. </span><span style="background-color: white;">But when he had tasted it, he refused to drink.</span></i><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">Luke 23:36 also states the same thing: </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><i>Even the soldiers jeered at him. As they approached to offer him wine.</i></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white;">Notice that in Matthew's narrative, Jesus actually tasted the sour wine but, refused to drink. Again, He choose to carry on regardless of the weight of our sins. However, there did finally come a time when Jesus, having known that His hour had come, did give Himself up and this happens precisely when he drinks the final cup of wine. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2015:36&version=NKJV" target="_blank">Mark 15:36</a> & <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2027:48&version=NKJV" target="_blank">Matthew 27:48</a>, we see that a bystander comes and gives Jesus wine to drink off of a sponge, immediately in both Gospels, Jesus gives out a loud cry and dies. It is in John's Gospel, however, that we get to see exactly what happened at the foot of the cross, remember, St. John was actually there!</span><br />
<br />
In John 19:28-30 we get to see the Passover - that originally began in the upper room - finally come to a close. The evangelist writes:<br />
<br />
<i><span style="background-color: white;">After this, aware that everything was now finished, in order that the scripture might be fulfilled,</span><span style="background-color: white;"> Jesus said, "I thirst." </span><span style="background-color: white;">There was a vessel filled with common wine. </span><span style="background-color: white;">So they put a sponge soaked in wine on a sprig of hyssop and put it up to his mouth. </span><span style="background-color: white;">When Jesus had taken the wine, he said, "It is finished." And bowing his head, he handed over the spirit.</span></i><br />
<i><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></i>
Notice what St. John tells us, he states that Jesus knew that His hour had come and so he willingly and freely asked for that final 4th cup of wine which was placed on a sprig of hyssop (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus%2012:22&version=NKJV" target="_blank">Exodus 12:22</a>!) and, most importantly, he says the words that any rabbi would've said to end the Passover celebration! By stating "It is finished" (tel telesti) Christ ended the Seder and introduced all of us to eternal life.<br />
<br />
With regards to Pope Benedict XVI, what we have to appreciate is the fact that, much like Jesus, he too has had numerous times to quit and yet, he continued on. He continued on even in the face of the sexual abuse crisis, corruption allegations, a financial scandal and, most recently, the traitorous actions of his own butler. He knew that leading the 1.3 billion Catholics of the world would be no easy task and, truly, such a heavy load could take a toll on almost any of us much less an 85 year old man in poor health.<br />
<br />
Therefore I suggest that we, as Catholics, not look at our 265th Pontiff in a bad or negative light but, that we continue to have faith in the Office of the Papacy - an office that is protected by the Holy Spirit itself! That we as Catholics ardently pray for our current Pope, because he will certainly be praying for us even in retirement and, let us never forget, that Jesus knew when his time had come and so we too must acknowledge and respect that Pope Benedict XVI has freely and willingly also realized the same thing.<br />
<br />
St. Peter, first Pope of the Catholic Church, pray for us!Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-22888886912180552692013-02-05T12:05:00.001-05:002013-02-05T12:05:06.480-05:00Throwing Down the Gauntlet: Episode 2, Part 4Final part of this <i>Throwing Down the Gauntlet Episode</i>! Sorry for the delay in getting this post up but, unfortunately, my PC got a virus and I was forced to redo A LOT of what I already had written. Let this be a lesson to all my fellow bloggers: always keep a detailed list of all of your sources! Anywho, enough of my personal issues, here you go guys...Part 4!<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/bRpmda1ILh0?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">@ 46:22 – <i>“Now let’s examine
a couple of references to Mary during the ministry of Jesus. Mark 3<span style="background: white;"> </span>verse 21 and then we’ll jump down to verses
31-35. Jesus had been working non-stop and His mother and brothers and sisters
thought he was at the point of a nervous breakdown…and they’re going to come
and take him home…were Mary and His brothers and sisters in tune with the
purpose of His ministry, with the purpose of what he was doing? Absolutely not!”</i><span style="background: white;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Mr. Bohr would have us depict Mary as
being unfaithful to her Son because she thought that he had gone crazy. However,
this definitely seems like a stretch when we consider that there is no explicit
mention of Mary in Mark 3:21, this verse states the following:<span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">When his relatives heard of this they set out to seize him, for
they said, "He is out of his mind."<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In other words, it was Jesus’ relatives
who are taking Him to of gone insane – not Mary. This same manner of thought can
actually be crossed-referenced in John 7:5 in which the evangelist basically
repeats the same notion in regards to His relatives when he states:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">For his brothers did not believe in him.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">It is clearly obvious that in Mark 3:21,
it was his kinsmen who did not believe. Additionally, if we look at the term
that is used in Mark 3:21 for <i>relatives</i>,
we see that the Greek uses the phrase<span style="background: white;"> </span></span><span class="word"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">ο</span></i></span><span class="word"><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">ἱ</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><span class="word"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">παρ'</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><span class="word"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">α</span></i></span><span class="word"><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">ὐ</span></i></span><span class="word"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">το</span></i></span><span class="word"><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ascii-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman";">ῦ</span></i></span><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">
or, <i>hoi par autou</i>, which literally
translates as “<i>those with him</i>” to
refer to who it was that went to go seize a hold of Jesus. One need only look
at several Protestant bible translations to see that even they don’t agree with
this phrase meaning <i>relatives</i>:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #45818e;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark%203:21&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">KJV translates it as “friends”</span></span></a><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #45818e;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark%203:21&version=AMP" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">AMP translates it as “those who belonged to Him”</span></span></a><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #45818e;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark%203:21&version=CEB" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">CEB translates it as “his family”</span></span></a><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #45818e;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark%203:21&version=DARBY" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">DARBY translates it as “his relatives”</span></span></a><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #45818e;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark%203:21&version=KNOX" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">KNOX translates it as “those who were nearest him”</span></span></a><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #45818e;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark%203:21&version=LEB" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">LEB has a footnote that translates it as those “closest to him”</span></span></a><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #45818e;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark%203:21&version=NASB" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">NASB translates it as “His own people”</span></span></a><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #45818e;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark%203:21&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">NIV has a footnote that translates it as “his associates”</span></span></a><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark%203:21&version=WYC" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">WYC translates it as “his kinsmen”</span></a></span><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Therefore, to state that Jesus’
mother along with his brothers and sisters, as Mr. Bohr states, were the ones
who went to go seize Jesus is not in line with the original Greek text nor
other numerous Protestant bible versions. And, as stated before, this verse
NEVER mentions Mary, Mr. Bohr here is simply implying that she was present
among those who came to get Him.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Mr. Bohr continues his assault on
the Blessed Virgin by suggesting that Mary was unfaithful to Jesus because she
did not understand the <b>“purpose of His
ministry.”</b> This is without a doubt the most absurd thing that Mr. Bohr has
said in this entire video up to this point! He’s basically saying that Mary -
who biblically speaking was known to ponder things in her heart (see <a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2013/01/throwing-down-gauntlet-episode-2-part-3.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">here</span></a> @40:47) -
forgot that He was the Messiah and, because she forgot that he was the Son of
God, she arrived at the wrongful conclusion that the Son of Man had gone
insane! <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Considering the biblical evidence,
this goes against who Mary was: she was a favored young girl endowed with grace
that was visited by an angel and told she would bear the Savior of the World.
She was told by the angel that her barren cousin was pregnant which she later confirms
when she goes to visit her. Her cousin prophesies that her child is the Lord
and then, after Jesus’ birth, some wise men from the East come to pay Him
homage and adore Him. She then lived with the Word Incarnate for over thirty
years in which time she ate with Him, prayed with Him and talked with Him but
yet – according to Mr. Bohr – all of this must’ve simply slipped her mind when
she lost faith in who her son actually was. Really Mr. Bohr, really?<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">NOWHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT STATE
THAT MARY EVER LOST HER FAITH IN HER SON, considering all that she knew about
Him, only a daft person bent on showcasing Mary as anything but extraordinary,
could come to this proposition. Additionally, if the author of Mark's Gospel had wanted to depict Mary as having lost faith in her Son then he could've very easily of done so. For we see in Mark's Gospel the reoccurring theme of the Apostles being perplexed at the mysteries that Jesus is revealing (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%209:32&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Mk. 9:32</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2010:32&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">10:32</span></a>;<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2010:38&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">38</span></a>) as well as Peter being rebuked by Jesus for not being able to accept the fact that the Messiah must suffer (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%208:33&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Mk. 8:33</span></a>)! Not only that but chapter 14 is chock full of instances in which the faith of his Apostles are clearly shaken to the core: In <span style="color: #45818e;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2014:10-11&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Mark 14:10-11</span></a>;<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2014:43-45&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">43-45</span></a></span> we see Judas' betrayal, in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2014:66-72&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Mark 14:66-72</span></a> we see Peter denying Jesus three times and in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2014:50&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Mark 14:50</span></a>, it is quite obvious that all 11 Apostles have deserted Him. My point is this, if the Holy inspired Gospel writer had wanted to demonstrate that Mary had ever lost faith in her Son, he had ample opportunities to do so. However, there is no explicit demonstration of such an event EVER recorded, therefore, Mary NEVER lost faith in Him.</span></span><br />
<span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span>
<span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">As for the </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%203:32-35&version=NKJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">latter
verses</span></span></a><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> that Mr. Bohr jumps to, Jesus
Christ is simply stating that the familial bond is no match for the true spiritual
bond that comes through Christ Himself. In other words, the “true family” of
Jesus are those who accept Him; this same passage is repeated in </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2012:46-50%20&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Matthew
12:46-50</span></span></a><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> and </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%208:19-21%20&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke
8:19-21</span></span></a><span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">, of particular note is that in
Luke 8:21 Christ says the following:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are
these which hear the word of God, and do it.”</span></i><span class="word"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> <o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Basically, only the ones who hear
the word of God and act upon it can truly be called members of Christ’s family.
Nothing in the synoptic passages of these readings ever suggest that Jesus is
somehow negating or disowning His mother nor that Mary somehow “lost her faith”
in Jesus.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="word"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="word"><b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">@ 48:02-49:03 - <i>“Jesus
once encountered a lady who really felt that it was a great privilege for Mary
to give birth to Jesus. Notice Luke 11 and verses 27 and 28…”</i><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<span class="word"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">The oft used passage favored by Protestant to refute any veneration of
Mary. </span></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In this passage – much like the ones mentioned above -
Jesus is not<span style="background: #F3F3EA;"> </span>distancing Himself from
His Mother or slighting her as some would suggest. Rather, He is telling us
(again) that blood<span style="background: #F3F3EA;"> </span>relations are not
what is important and that it </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">doesn't matter if you are a
relative of Jesus - as if that were</span><span style="background-color: #f3f3ea; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">something
to boast about. What is important is to hear the Word of God and obey.</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Moreover Luke details Jesus’
journey through Jerusalem from Lk. 9:51 to Lk. 19:27, in which we see Jesus constantly
tell those who want to be his disciples that they must give up familial ties
and personal material possessions. In </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%209:57-62&version=NIV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke
9:57-62</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, Jesus tells some men who want to
follow him that to be a true Christian disciple family bonds and obligations
cannot distract you from proclaiming the kingdom of God.* In </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2012:29-34&version=NIV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke
12:29-34</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, Christ says that one is to give up
their belongings and give them to the poor, basically a true follower of Jesus
must deny himself worldly goods in favor of the love of God. In </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2014:25-27&version=NIV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke
14:25-27</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, Jesus tells the large crowd that in order
to follow Him, they must,<i>“…hate father
and mother,<span style="background: white;"> </span>wife and children, brothers
and sisters…”</i><span style="background: white;"> </span>Is Jesus here telling
His believers to have disdain and animosity against their family? ABSOLUTELY
NOT!!! He’s simply stating that His followers can never<span style="background: white;"> </span>put anything above God especially family and, it is in this
context, that Luke 11:27-28 must be<span style="background: white;"> understood. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Mr. Bohr dares not to venture into this explicit view of Scripture because, once taken as a whole, his personally contrived view of Luke 11:27-28 completely falls apart. </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Luke 11:27 simply reiterates Luke 8:21 in that Jesus wants us to
hear the word of God and do His will, </span><u style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">this is</u><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> the teaching that
Scripture is attempting to lay out and not, as Mr. Bohr would have us believe,
a teaching against praising the Blessed Virgin!</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Furthermore if praising Mary is a bad
thing, then why did God let Gabriel praise her at the annunciation with his
greeting? Doesn’t this also mean that Mary’s cousin Elizabeth sinned when </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%201:42&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">she
exalted Mary</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> during her visitation to
Elizabeth’s home? Wouldn’t of St. John, in Elizabeth’s womb, have blasphemed by
leaping for joy when he heard Mary’s voice? Without a doubt, Mr. Bohr makes a
very obtuse and inconsistent interpretation of this passage in light of the
context in which it is framed. <span class="word"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="word"><b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">@
50:12-51:55 – <i>“Now we need to examine the
one reference to Mary after the Resurrection of Jesus. It’s found in the Book
of Acts, it is the final reference to Mary in the New Testament. After Acts 1
verses 13 and 14 there are no more references to Mary. It says there in Acts 1
verses 13 and 14</i>…[quotes passage]…<i>you
know it’s really exciting to notice that
His brothers came around, His brothers actually were in the upper room and they
accepted Jesus as the Messiah...there is no special emphasis here placed upon
Mary, they’re not praying to Mary, they’re not exalting Mary. In fact the
central figure on the day of Pentecost is…Peter.”</i> <o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Mr. Bohr states that it’s exciting to
see that the brothers of Jesus finally came around to accepting Jesus as
Messiah. Here Mr. Bohr, again, incorrectly asserts that Jesus had some form of biological
siblings. However, if we are to believe that verse 14 states that Jesus’
biological brothers were there in the upper room, then verse 15 would’ve made
Mary a very “busy” woman:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In those days Peter stood up among<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">the
brothers<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>(the company of persons was in all about 120) and<span style="background: white;"> </span>said…<span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Basically, if verse 14 was talking about
Jesus’ biological brothers, then surely, the very next verse – which mentions His
brothers - has them numbered at around 120!
And, lest some of you think that I’ve deliberately misinterpreted this
passage, the Greek word used here is </span><span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">ἀ</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">δελφ</span><span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">ό</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">ς or, <i>adelphon</i>,<a href="http://www.blogger.com/goog_765097684"><span style="color: #45818e;"><span id="goog_765097685"></span> </span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=9102213451567759312" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">which means <i>brother<span id="goog_765097686"></span></i></span></a></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">.</span>** So, if we are to follow Mr. Bohr’s rationale, then not only
was Mary not a perpetual virgin but, she would’ve had to have been remarried as
well as birthed 2 children every year until the year 60 A.D. in order to
reconcile Scripture with the notion that Jesus had 120 or so brothers via His
mother Mary! Sounds rather ridiculous, doesn’t it? <i><span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">One thing that is exciting though, is
the fact that Mr. Bohr acknowledges the primacy of St. Peter in Acts, indeed it
is in the Book of Acts that we see the Prince of the Apostles shine with all of
the authority that Jesus bestowed upon him as he was to create Christ’s one and
only church. It is through the Book of Acts that we see who Peter is; indeed in<span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;"> </span></span></span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PXV.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Acts 1:15-22</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, Peter - with the rest of the Apostles and disciples of Jesus - stand
up and declare that it is only lawful that the office of Judas be occupied by
one of the brethren. Notice that he isn’t stating a suggestion, St. Peter –
with the authority given to him by Jesus – infallibly states that succession is
necessary per Scripture & per his authority in Jesus’ new church. They then
they draw lots and Matthias is chosen; nobody states any disapproval nor
comments to the contrary. Peter has spoken. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In Acts 2:14, we see the supremacy of
St. Peter again as he delivers the very first sermon at Pentecost. In chapter 3,
</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts%203:1-8&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">verses 1-8</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, we see him heal a crippled man much to the amazement of the
Israelites present. In chapter 4, Peter and the Apostles are put before the Sanhedrin
and accused of blasphemy and in verses 8-13, Peter stands up and proudly
proclaims Jesus to be the Messiah; so bold are his actions that the Jewish
elders decide to let him go! Why, because the Vicar of Christ has spoken!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In Acts 5 we see that Ananias, and his
wife Sapphira, attempt to trick Peter out of money that he had given to the
Church, Peter confronts him and, when Ananias denies retaining the money, he
promptly drops dead. An hour later, Sapphira arrives and Peter asks her if it
is true that they sold the land for a certain amount. She then lies to Peter
and dies right there on the spot! Why did this happen? Because, as Peter told
Ananias in<span style="background: white;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts5:3-4&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">verse3 and 4</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, they did not lie to a man but to the
Holy Spirt – that is, to God Himself. In chapter 10, St. Peter is the first one
to baptize a gentile; think about that, Peter receives the very first
non-Jewish convert and there is not so much as a peep from the community nor
any of the other Apostles & disciples! This situation gets to a head in
chapter 11 when<span style="background: white;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2011:2&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">the circumcised Jewish believers confront Peter in Jerusalem</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, he basically tells them that God spoke to him in visions (see <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2011:5-10&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="text-decoration: initial;"><span style="color: #45818e;">verses 5-10</span></span></a>
which depict the gentiles as “unclean animals”) and that they were to allow the
gentiles into the Church. Is there any further bickering from this
confrontation? No, want to know why? Because the Head of the<span style="background: white;"> </span>Apostles, the <i>Primus inter pares</i>, that is, the first among equals, has declared
it to be so by the power of the Holy Spirit.<span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Lastly, in Acts chapter 15 we see the
biggest of all of the scandals that rocked the early church. In Acts 15:1, we
are told that some members of the early church were going around saying that
unless you were circumcised, in accordance to Mosaic Law, you cannot be saved.
This matter was so serious that St. Paul & St. Barnabas go to Jerusalem to
discuss the matter with the Apostles. At this meeting in Jerusalem, known as
the<span style="background: white;"><span style="color: #45818e;"> </span></span></span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/en/san_paolo/concilio.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Council of Jerusalem</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, some of the Pharisees whom
had become believers in Christ decried that circumcision was necessary, after
all, God said that circumcision was to be an “everlasting covenant”<span style="background: white;"> </span>(see </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gen%2017:9-14&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Gen. 17:9-14</span></a>) and therefore could not be undone.<span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">As the debate is raging on, we see the
pre-eminence in Peter yet again. Acts 15:7-11 states<span style="background: white;">:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">After much debate had taken place, Peter got up and said to them,
"My brothers, you are well aware that<span style="background: white;"> </span>from
early days God made his choice among you that through my mouth the Gentiles
would hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart,
bore witness by granting them the holy Spirit just as he did us. He made no
distinction between us and them, for by faith he purified their hearts. Why,
then, are you now putting God to the test by placing on the shoulders of the
disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear? On
the contrary, we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus,
in the same way as they."<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Can you imagine the riot that broke
out? It’s one thing to be the leader of a church but, to say that the
everlasting covenant which the Lord God gave unto the Jews as a sign that they
were His people is now null and void? Without a doubt there had to of been so
much in-fighting that the early Church began to divide, right? Acts chapter 15
verse 12:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The whole assembly fell silent, and they listened while Paul and
Barnabas described the signs and wonders God had worked among the Gentiles
through them.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">There was no melee,
disagreement, discussion nor argument. Why? Peter, the first Pope, had spoken.
I must note at this point that this study has to do specifically with Mary and,
to go about Christian history and prove that Peter was the first leader of the
Catholic Church, would be rather demeaning to my argument. As such, let us
continue with Mr. Bohr’s and the SDA’s view of who Mary is.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">@ 52:06-52:33 – <i>“…some
people might assume that because her death is not mentioned, maybe she was
assumed into heaven after she died…it is not so significant that the death of
Mary was not mentioned because, most of the deaths of the disciples are not
mentioned either. We simply don’t know about the deaths of most of the Apostles
and we don’t know about the death of Mary.”<o:p></o:p></i></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">For
a more detailed analysis of the Assumption of Mary, see<span style="color: #45818e;"> </span></span></span><a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/08/thowing-down-gauntlet-part-2.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">here</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;"> </span>at 19:58. As for the deaths of the Apostles, the only reason Mr.
Bohr can say that he doesn’t know anything about their deaths is because his Church
history only extends to the latter half of the 19<sup>th</sup> century. Mr.
Bohr implores this tactic in order to repudiate any claims that might be had in
determining what happened to the Apostles via extra-biblical resources. Like
most Protestants, Mr. Bohr has ignorantly refused to look at any historical
evidence, from within Christian history, that my shed light on knowing more
about the deaths of the Apostles; ironically enough, he chooses to take the
word of Ellen G. White - a prophetess who’s predictions are extremely questionable
– instead of the word of Catholic presbyters and historians that lived during
Christianity’s early era. Let’s quickly see what happened to the Apostles per
Christian history and Church Tradition, click<span style="color: #45818e;"> </span></span></span><a href="https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&source=embed&t=h&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=201812973222981115902.0004a34723ee4dfea9853" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">here</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;"> </span>for an interactive map of showing where the Apostles died at.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">PETER<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Martyred in Rome, crucified upside down - Verified by
Roman historian Josephus as well as St. Clement of Rome who wrote, around 90
A.D., in his <i>Epistle to the Corinthians</i>
</span></span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 8.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ii.ii.v.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">chapter 5</span></span></a></span><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">.</span></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">ANDREW<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span class="text"><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">Martyred
in Patras via crucifixion – the apocryphal work </span></span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0819.htm" target="_blank"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Acts of Andrew</span></span></i></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">, written around 260 A.D., states that he was bound to a
cross in the shape of an "X". Historian Eusebius mentions this work in Book III of his <i>Church History</i> (see </span></span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250103.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">chapter 25</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">)
and St. Epiphanius in his <i>Panarion</i> </span></span><a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=DAP-uJTfc84C&pg=PA3&lpg=PA3&dq=epiphanius+panarion+Acts+of+Andrew&source=bl&ots=UpVwM8M2t6&sig=DI30VnSJkk-nScMUjYVDvniFQww&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ef4HUYmJK4j89QS6-IC4Dg&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=epiphanius%20panarion%20Acts%20of%2"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">also makes
mention</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;"> </span>this work.</span></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">JAMES (son of Zebedee)<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Martyred in Jerusalem,
beheaded with a sword – </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2012:1-2&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Acts 12:1-2</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, state that it was
Herod Agrippa I who killed James. Additionally Eusebius, in Book II of his
Church History (see </span></span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250102.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">chapter 9</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">) makes mention of this fact.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">JOHN<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Died at Ephesus of old
age.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">PHILLIP<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Martyred in Hierapolis
– according to the non-canonical work </span></span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0818.htm" target="_blank"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Acts of Philip</span></span></i></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, which was
written in the mid 300’s, St. Philip converts the wife of a high ranking city
official, which in turn enrages the official, and he has St. Philip, his
brother and sister crucified.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">THOMAS<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Killed in Mylapor – the
Gnostic work,<span style="color: #45818e;"> </span></span></span><a href="http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/actsthomas.html" target="_blank"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Acts of Thomas</span></span></i></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, states that he was killed by a band of soliders who were sent by
an idolatrous priest (see paragraphs 159-168).<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">MATTHEW<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Died of old age –
Gnostic writer Heracleon, writing in the first half of the second century, states
that St. Matthew was never martyred. In St. Clement of Alexandria’s <i>Stromata</i><span style="color: #45818e;"> </span></span></span><a href="http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/clement-stromata-book4.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Book 4 chapter 9</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> (circa 200
A.D.), he too makes mention of this fact.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">JAMES (</span></b></span><b><span style="color: #00002a; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">son of Alphaeus)</span></b><span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Martyred via
crucifixion in Egypt – Roman Historian Josephus makes mention of him in the 20<sup>th</sup>
Book of his <i>Antiquities of the Jews</i> </span></span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-20.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">chapter 9</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">. Eusibius mentions him in his <i>Church
History</i><span style="color: #45818e;"> </span></span></span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250102.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Book II chapter 23</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, St.
Jerome also mentions his death in his <i>De
Viris Illustribus</i> (see </span></span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2708.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">chapter 2</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">) which was written around the late 4<sup>th</sup> century and St.
<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">JUDE (Thaddaeus)<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Martyred via clubbing
and beheading in Persia.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">SIMON (the Zealot)<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Martyred by being sawed
in half. He was a traveling companion of Jude, tradition holds they were
martyred together.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">MATTHIAS<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Martyred in Ethiopia – </span></span><a href="http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/golden172.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Tradition states</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;"> </span>that St. Matthias was
stoned and beheaded by non-believing Jews.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">PAUL<o:p></o:p></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span class="text"><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Martyred by beheading
in Rome - Eusibius states in <i>Church
History</i>, </span></span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250102.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Book II chapter 25</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, that Paul
was martyred during the persecution of Nero. St. Jerome also states this in <i>De Viris Illustribus</i><span style="color: #45818e;"> </span></span></span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2708.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">chapter 5</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">.</span></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">This is but a very
limited view of all of the different early Church documents that can be used to
determine just what happened to the Apostles. Mr. Bohr cannot make any type of
claim for any particular form of historical astuteness because his church lacks
the pedigree to do so. The Catholic Church, however, stands above all other
Christian churches due to her derivation and, it is because of her origin that
we, as Catholics, have so many of the answers that Protestants don’t have or don't want to
know about.</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span class="text"></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">@52:35-53:38 - <i>“The last
group that resurrected were those who came forth from the grave when Jesus
resurrected in Matthew chapter 27, verses 51 to 53. The next group which will
resurrect, according to the New Testament, are those who will come forth from
the tomb when Jesus descends from heaven with the shout, the voice of the
archangel and with the trump of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. We
find this very interesting reference in ‘Manuscript Releases Vol. 5’…notice
this comment: Mary, the mother of our Lord has not been raised….All the prayers
offered to Mary fall to the ground. Mary’s ears have not yet been pierced by
the sound of the trump of God.”<o:p></o:p></i></span></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In terms of the
Church’s interpretation of Matthew 27:51-53 - a resurrection occurrence that
only happens in the Gospel of Matthew - one need only look to St. Thomas
Aquinas’ mid 14<sup>th</sup> century work <i>Catena
Aurea</i>. In </span></span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/aquinas/catena1.ii.xxvii.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">chapter 27</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> of his commentary on
Matthew, Aquinas details what the early Church Fathers believed this passage to
mean:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="normal" style="margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;">
<b><span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">St. Jerome:</span></b><span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"> <i>As Lazarus rose from the dead, so also did
many bodies of the Saints rise again to shew forth the Lord’s resurrection; yet
notwithstanding that the graves were opened, they did not rise again before the
Lord rose, that He might be the first-born of the resurrection from the dead.<o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="normal" style="margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;">
<i><span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">“The holy city” in which they were seen after they had risen may be
understood to mean either the heavenly Jerusalem, or this earthly, which once
had been holy. For the city of Jerusalem was called Holy on account of the
Temple and the Holy of Holies, and to distinguish it from other cities in which
idols were worshipped.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="normal" style="margin-bottom: 9.0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;">
<i><span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">When it is said, “And appeared unto many,” it is signified that this
was not a general resurrection which all should see, but special, seen only by
such as were worthy to see it.<span style="color: #222222;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">St. Remigius:</span></b></span><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></span><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">But
someone will ask, what became of those who rose again when the Lord rose. We
must believe that they rose again to be witnesses of the Lord’s resurrection.
Some have said that they died again, and were turned to dust, as Lazarus and
the rest whom the Lord raised. But we must by no means give credit to these
men’s sayings, since if they were to die again, it would be greater torment to
them, than if they had not risen again. We ought therefore to believe without
hesitation that they who rose from the dead at the Lord’s resurrection,
ascended also into heaven<span style="background: #EFEFEF;"> </span>together with
Him.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">Origen:</span></b><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.5pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"> </span><i><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">These same mighty works are
still done every day; the veil of the temple is rent for the Saints, in order
to reveal the things that are contained within. The earthquakes, that is, all
flesh because of the new word and new things of the New Testament. The rocks
are rent, i.e. the mystery of the Prophets, that we may see the spiritual
mysteries bid in their depths. The graves are the bodies of sinful souls, that
is, souls dead to God; but when by God’s grace these souls have been raised,
their bodies which before were graves, become bodies of Saints, and appear to
go out of themselves, and follow Him who rose again, and </span></i><i><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">walk with Him in newness of life; and such as are<span style="background: #EFEFEF;"> </span>worthy to have their conversation in heaven
enter into the Holy City at divers times, and appear unto<span style="background: #EFEFEF;"> </span>many who see their good works.</span></i><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">These similar
interpretations all derive from the fact that, as the </span><a href="http://www.ccel.org/creeds/apostles.creed.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Apostle’s Creed</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">
states, Jesus - like all men – experienced death and, according to </span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a5p1.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">CCC #632</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">,
“His soul joined the others in the realm of the dead. But he descended there as
Savior, proclaiming the Good News to the spirits imprisoned there.” St. Peter also
mentions this occurrence, in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Peter%203:18-20&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">1Peter 3:18-20</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> we read:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">For Christ also
suffered once</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">for sins, the
righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God.</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">He was put to death in the</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">body</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">but made
alive in the Spirit.<b><sup> </sup></b>After being made alive, he went and made
proclamation<span style="background: white;"> </span>to the imprisoned spirits —</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">to those who were</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">disobedient</span></i></span><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">long ago…<span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">So, what we have here is the fact that Jesus, after
his bodily death, went into the depths of </span><a href="http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13563-sheol" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">sheol</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">
and delivered, from captivity, the souls that had been held captive there (see </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2086:13&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Psalm 86:13</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">) and, in doing so, Jesus freed from slavery those
who were dead and raised them up into eternal glory. So manifested was the
power of the resurrection that, those whom were raised in Christ, began to
appear here on Earth! As </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2027:52-53&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Matthew 27 verses 52 & 53</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> states:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text">…</span><span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">and the
graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were
raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went
into the holy city and appeared to many.</span></i><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">This was the power that Jesus wrought at the
resurrection, the power to give life to the dead. However, we are now forced to
take note of what Mr. Bohr stated at the 52:52 mark when he quoted </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20thessalonians%204:16&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">1Thessalonians 4:16</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">. Mr. Bohr mentions that “<b>the next group</b>” that resurrects will be
those who await the mighty shout of God which is proclaimed with the sound of a
trumpet. He further goes on to mention that Mary too is awaiting this sound to
“pierce her ears” so that she may also be resurrected. Now, you might say this
is an odd way of looking at the resurrection after all, according to </span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P2L.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">CCC #1022</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">,
upon death the soul:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">…</span></i></span><span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">either
enters into the blessedness of heaven - through a purification or
immediately, - or immediate and everlasting damnation.<o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Well to the vast majority of Christians, this is the
view of what happens to us when we die, you either go up or, you either go
down. Unfortunately, the SDA church, doesn’t share this view, because they
believe in the wholly Millerite belief of “soul sleep.” This concept basically states that when you
die, your soul “goes to sleep” and it remains “asleep” until Jesus’ coming, at
which point, your soul will be awaken and judged. This is why Mr. Bohr, in
quoting <i>Manuscript Releases Vol. 5</i>,
has the audacity to state that it is of no use to ask the Blessed Mother for
prayers since they fall on deaf ears.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">This belief of “soul sleep” is so at odds with
historic Christianity and Scriptures, that I find it necessary to elaborate
more on this subject. To begin with, where does the SDA get this idea? They get
it from Scripture, in particular, </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ecclesiastes%209:5&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Ecclesiastes 9:5</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">
which says:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="line">
<span class="text"><i><span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">For the living know that they will die;</span></i></span><i><span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"> <span class="text">But the dead know nothing,</span> <span class="text">and they have no
more reward</span></span></i><i><span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"> <span class="text">for the memory of them
is forgotten.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="line">
<i><span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"><span class="text"><br /></span></span></i></div>
<div class="line">
<span class="text"><span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">From this one
passage, taken entirely out of context, the SDA deduce that, since the dead
know nothing and yet they are awaiting resurrection, they must be – for lack of
a better theological term - “asleep”. Hence, the Seventh Day Adventist believes
that at death the individual goes into some sort of a spiritual sleep state, in
other words, when Christ returns, He will awaken the faithful SDA member and
take him/her to their eternal reward. However, it is the latter half of Ecclesiastes
9:5 that is the ultimate undoing of the concept of “soul sleep;” notice that
the second part of this verse states that there is no reward nor memory for the
dead and, when we cross-reference this SDA belief against Scripture, we find
that the concept of “soul sleep” becomes very questionable if not entirely
anti-biblical.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11pt;">If we are to take the SDA’s word
at face value then there are several times in the Bible that demonstrate, quite
succinctly, that the dead are not necessarily “asleep.” Case in point, </span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P7M.HTM" style="font-size: 11pt;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">1Samuel 28</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> in which
me see that Saul, being afraid of the advancing Philistine army, goes to the
witch of Endor to conjure up the spirit of Samuel the prophet who was already
dead. Through God’s merciful and divine ordinance, He allows the ghost of
Samuel to appear and speak to Saul, in which Samuel tells Saul that he has
continued to be an enemy of God and that both he and his sons will be dead by
the next day as well the fact that the Israelites will be overtaken by the
Philistines (</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20samuel%2028:18-19&version=KJV" style="font-size: 11pt;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">verses 18 & 19</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt;">). Clearly then, it is noted that Samuel – although dead – was
not “asleep,” the author of 1 Samuel mentions that the witch was able to
describe who she saw and that, almost immediately, Saul recognized that she was
in fact describing Samuel (</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20samuel%2028:14&version=KJV" style="font-size: 11pt;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">verse 14</span></a><span style="font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">)</span>.</span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="line">
</div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2016:19-31&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke chapter 16 verses 19-31</span></a>, we hear about the story of Lazarus and the rich
man. In this parable, Jesus tells his listeners that both the rich man and
Lazarus die and that Lazarus is taken into the bossom of Abraham and the rich
man is sent into torment. This is a very hard parable to reconcile with the
concept of “soul sleep” because by the SDA’s very definition, the rich man –
who is dead – should’ve been “asleep” but, he is not. The rich man is asking
Abraham – who is dead and should also be “asleep” – to send Lazarus – who is
dead and should also be “asleep” – to his family and warn them of eternal
damnation. Abraham – who obviously isn’t “asleep” – speaks to the rich man and
tells him that his time has come and that there is no way to warn his family. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">The interesting thing here is that, once again, the dead are alive and
communicating which explicitly demonstrates that they are not “asleep.” The SDA
may make mention that this is simply a parable that Jesus is imploring in order
to teach a bigger theological truth, to which an unanswerable question can be
posed to the Seventh Day Adventist: name one parable that is not based in real
life? Time and time again, Jesus always uses real life situations, based in
reality, in all of His parables so that his listeners would understand them.
The SDA would thus have us believe that Jesus made up the story of Lazarus and
the rich man without ever basing it on something that was real! That Jesus
totally fabricated this parable is indeed a preposterous assumption in order to justify the
Seventh Day Adventist’s doctrinal view.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="line">
</div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">This is but two examples of there
being a consciousness even in death, some others include:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">-<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2022:32-33&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Matthew 22:32-33</span></a> - Jesus states that God is not “the God of the dead” but, the God
of the living.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">-<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Phil%201:23&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Philipians 1:23</span></a> – St. Paul states he looks forward to dying in order to be with Jesus,
he does not state he looks forward to some form of spiritual slumber. St. Paul
reiterates this again in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20corinthians%205:6-9&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #134f5c;">2Corinthians 5:6-9</span></a>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">-<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%204:6&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">1Peter 4:6</span></a> - Much like 1 Peter 3:19, St. Peter makes mention that the
gospel was preached to the dead.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">-<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%206:9-11&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Revelation 6:9-11</span></a> – St. John mentions that he saw the martyrs and heard their cry for
justice.</span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">The thing we must understand is
that the belief in “soul sleep” is – much like the Seventh Day Adventist Church
- a relatively new invention and historical Christianity begs to differ on this
concept that is so central to the SDA belief system. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="line">
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="line">
</div>
<div class="line">
<u><span style="font-size: 11.0pt;">Bonus point of truth:</span></u><span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"> An interesting parallel can be made from Saul’s
meeting with the witch at Endor in 1 Samuel 28 and the Annunciation in Luke 1.
In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%2028:21&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">1Sam 28:21</span></a>, after the appearance of the ghost of Samuel, the witch of Endor
tells Saul the following: <i>“…your maidservant has obeyed your voice, and I<span style="background: white;"> </span>have put my life in my hands and heeded the
words which you spoke to me.”</i> This is
almost identical to<span style="background: white;"> </span>what Mary says at the
appearance of another supernatural entity, the angel Gabriel, in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%201:38&version=NKJV" style="background-color: white;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke1:38</span></a> in which<span style="background: white;"> </span>Mary states: <i>“Behold the maidservant of the Lord! Let it
be to me according to your word.”</i> This is an<span style="background: white;">
</span>excellent set of passages that can easily do away with the SDA’s view of
Mary and “soul sleep” in one fell swoop!</span><br />
<span style="font-size: 11.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">@53:37 – “…</span></b><span class="text"><b><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">so this leads us to ask a very important question and that is,
‘who then is this Mary who is appearing at different parts of planet Earth at
present?’ If Mary died, and was buried, and she is awaiting the resurrection,
who are these entities that appear all over the world claiming to be the Virgin
Mary?”<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Here we have Mr. Bohr
attempting to cast some form of fantasmagorical and insidious curtain over the
apparitions of the Blessed Virgin. While I won’t go into a robust defense of
such appearances of Mary in this post, what I will say is this: as stated
earlier, when Jesus died, he went and preached to the souls who were imprisoned - Scripture tells us this much. At which point these souls were freed from the
bondages of death (see </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Heb%202:14-15&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Heb. 2:14-15</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">) and, according to
scripture itself, these released souls <b>WERE
SEEN</b> by many (see </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt.%2027:53&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Matt. 27:53</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">). Clearly then, by
God’s own grace and mercy, He allowed these newly resurrected souls to appear
to people, so then, why wouldn’t He also allow the Mother of God to do so as well
in our present time? Surely, if these souls that Jesus HAD TO preach to were
allowed to materialize back on Earth, to proclaim the gospel to others, then,
without a doubt, Mary too can also be used by God in this same way as well.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The issue here is that
the Seventh Day Adventist cannot get over the totally fallacious and erroneous
notion of “soul sleep.” Without being able to jump over that hurdle, Mr. Bohr
has to leap to the assumption that, since Mary is still waiting to be
resurrected, all of these apparitions must be demonic or otherworldly. However,
as Catholics we know that Mary <i>is</i>
already resurrected, she is in full communion with God the Father, her Son, the
Holy Spirit, all of the angels and all of the saints and by virtue of Jesus’
sacrifice, we too are in communion with the heavenly court; therefore to the Catholic,
it is not an impossibility that Mary could in fact appear here on Earth if God
so willed it.</span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></b>
<b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">@54:13 – <i>“Now I would like
to deal with one final reference and that is the reference to the woman who is
‘clothed with the Sun’ and who is standing on the moon. I have visited, for
example, many Roman Catholic Cathedrals and I’ve discovered that many times
Mary is depicted as standing on the moon, clothed with the Sun, having a crown
of twelve stars on her head, with the baby Jesus in her arms and also trampling
upon the serpent…Now is this woman of Revelation chapter 12 actually Mary? If
you look carefully at the text, you will find that it is not Mary.</i></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">While Mr. Bohr
correctly states that the woman of Revelation chapter 12 <b><i>CAN BE</i></b> the church
represented symbolically, it has also historically (I wonder why a church
that’s only been around for 150 years has such an issue with Christian
history?) been view as representing Mary. To begin with, let’s do what Mr.
Bohr says we ought to do, let’s look <i><b>“</b></i><b>carefully at the text”</b> and see if this
can be a symbolic representation of Mary. Let’s begin by reading some of
Revelation chapter 11 and into Revelation chapter 12 without any breaks, the
reason we need to do this is because this is the way the original text was
written, verses and chapters were put in during the medieval era (by<span style="color: #45818e;"> </span></span></span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Langton" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">a Catholic Cardinal</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">!), so let’s see if
there is some form of continuation between these two chapters starting off at
Revelation 11:19 and ending at Revelation 12:6 we read:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Then God's temple in heaven was
opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were
flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a
violent hailstorm. </span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">A
great sign appeared in the sky, a woman<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>clothed
with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve
stars. She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give
birth.<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Then another sign appeared
in the sky; it was a huge red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and on
its heads were seven diadems. Its tail swept away a third of<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span></i><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P12V.HTM" title="Click to Continue > by Text-Enhance"><i><span style="color: windowtext; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">the stars</span></i></a><span class="apple-converted-space"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></i></span><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">in the sky and hurled them down to
the earth. Then the dragon stood before the woman about to give birth, to
devour her child when she gave birth. She gave birth to a son, a male child,
destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod.<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>Her child was caught up to God and his
throne. The woman herself fled into the desert where she had a place prepared
by God, that there she might be taken care of for twelve hundred and sixty
days.</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In his vision John sees the temple, a
very significant thing for any Jewish convert to Christianity because the
temple at Jerusalem had already been destroyed by the time John penned his
apocalypse. Think about that for a second, the most holiest of buildings for
the Jews, which God commissioned and dwelt in, is seen by John in heaven and in
the temple but, even more interesting, is that immediately after seeing the ark
of His covenant, who does John see? A woman! Upon close examination, there
seems to be a definitive connection between the ark of His covenant and a woman
and, why wouldn’t there be?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Let’s not forget that it was in John’s
gospel, at the Wedding Feast at Cana, that Mary and Jesus are introduced on a
proverbial “seventh day” and, just like in the Book of Genesis, Mary is called
woman in the same manner that Eve is also called simply woman. As I have
already stated in Part 3 of this Episode, Mary is constantly depicted by the Early Church Fathers as the Second Eve, as well as the Ark of the New
Covenant; therefore I would suggest to you that, when St. John sees the ark of
the covenant and then immediately he sees a “woman,” one could very ardently
argue that the woman clothe with the sun is Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant –
the same Ark that John sees in Revelation 11:19!</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Additionally, this interpretation bares
more weight when we read in Revelation 12:5 that the woman, <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“…gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the
nations with an iron rod. Her child was<span style="background: white;"> caught
up to God and his throne.”</span></span></i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Naturally, this is speaking of Christ so
therefore the woman <b><i>CAN BE</i></b> thought of to be Mary. Moreover, to have Mary depicted
as stepping on the serpent’s head is a very apt depiction of who Mary is in
light of the prophecy in </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gen%203:15&version=NKJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Genesis 3:15</span></a>. Mr. Bohr simply doesn’t realize that
while the woman <b><i>CAN BE</i></b> interpreted to represent the Church, it can also
symbolize Mary as well as the people of Israel. However, the true anti-Catholic
cynic, will likely point out that Revelation 12:2 states that the woman <i>“cried
out in labor and in pain to give birth,”</i> and then they will say that this cannot be Mary
since labor pains are a condition given by God due to the very first sin
committed by Adam and Eve. So, if we Catholics believe that Mary was
immaculately conceived, that is, she was born without original sin, how is it
that the woman in Revelation is having birthing pangs? Very simply put, the
“pains” the woman in Revelation is having need not necessarily be those of actual and physical labor pains; St. Paul wrote the following in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gal%204:19&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Galatians 4:19</span></a>,<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of
childbirth until Christ is formed in you…”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Are we to therefore assume that St. Paul
was having labor pains or, can we conclude that the work that St. Paul is
undertaking, to fully convert the Galatians from paganism, is a hard and at
times difficult job? St. Paul also uses the same analogy in 1 Thessalonians 5:1-3
when he states:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“Now, brothers and sisters,
about times and dates we do not need to write to you, for you know very
well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> While
people are saying, ‘Peace and safety,’ destruction
will come on them suddenly, as labor
pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Again, St. Paul describes the pains of
birth as an analogy, this time he uses it to describe the feeling of what awaits those who are not ready for Christ’s
eminent return. Hence, the fact that the woman in Revelation 12 is experiencing
labor pains need not mean literal birthing pangs. As I mentioned, the woman
clothe with the sun <b><i>CAN BE</i></b> interpreted to be Mary, the Church, or Israel, for Mr.
Bohr to make the assumption that this <b><i>CAN ONLY</i></b> be interpreted as a
symbolic representation of solely the Church, is to take a very narrow view of
scripture. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">This is also one of the greatest pitfalls in all of Protestantism,
Protestants tend to think of dogma and biblical interpretation as “either/or,”
that is, dogma can be <b>either</b> X <b>or</b> Y but never “both/and.” It is this
latter view which the Catholic Church adopts: the woman clothed with the sun
can be Mary as well as <b>both</b> the
Israelites <b>and </b>the Church; and, when
it comes to interpreting Revelation, the reader must take into consideration
the symbolism used. In </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rev%2017:9-10&version=NKJV"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Revelation
17:9-8</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, we see that:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“Here is the mind which has wisdom: The seven heads are
seven mountains on which the woman sits. There are also seven kings. Five
have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he
must continue a short time…”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">So, even in this passage, the seven
heads are described to be <b>both</b>
mountains <b>and </b>kings. It is therefore
up to the reader to discern what is being taught lest they incorrectly
interpret what Jesus was telling John to write down. Therefore, for Mr. Bohr to
eliminate 1 possible, and very applicable, interpretation of who the “woman clothed
with the sun” signifies, is to do away with the fullness of Christian history
as well as the fullness of Scripture. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">I'll conclude with what our current Vicar of Christ, Pope Benedict XVI, said in his</span><span class="text"><span style="background: white; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20060823_en.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">General Audience on August 23, 2006</span></a>, in regards to Revelation chapter 12:<span class="text"><span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“This Woman represents Mary, the Mother of the Redeemer, but at
the same time she also represents the whole Church, the People of God of all
times, the Church which in all ages, with great suffering, brings forth Christ
ever anew. And she is always threatened by the dragon's power. She appears
defenseless and weak. </span></i><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">But
while she is threatened, persecuted by the dragon, she is also protected by God’s
comfort. And in the end this Woman wins. The dragon does not win.</span></i><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">”</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Indeed, the dragon will never win. He lost in his battle against Mary, for he was unable to make her waver in her faith. He will lose against the New Heavenly Jerusalem for the celestial court is primed for battle, and so long as we as Christians have faith in God's only Begotten Son, Satan will lose his battle against the Church and Her faithful.<br />
<br />
St. Michael the Archangel, pray for us!</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">*</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 115%;"> Seems to
me that an unmarried priesthood would be the only type of disciple who could
fulfill this requirement. Now, which church is it that has only unmarried
Christian men as priest…?</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">**</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 115%;">I would
really suggest all Protestants to open up their version of the Bible and see if
Acts 1:15 has the word <i>brother</i> being
used. The fact of the matter is that Protestant translators have replaced the
word brother here with other words in order to suit their interpretations.
However, the Greek language coupled with simple common sense here lends to the
credence that the term brother need not be that of blood descendant.<span style="background: #F6FAFD;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-76392149996885015842013-01-11T16:18:00.001-05:002013-01-15T09:18:27.646-05:00Throwing Down the Gauntlet: Episode 2, Part 3This is the third part of a now 4 part Episode. My original intent was to only have 3 parts but, in the course of correcting all of the SDA's theological (as well as logical) errors, I was forced to do more explaining in order to properly set Catholic teaching up against Mr. Bohr's heretical claims. So, without further ado, I give you part 3:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/bRpmda1ILh0?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">@
27:27 – <i>“Not only, according to the
Gospels, was Mary greatly blessed but, we also find that Mary was ‘highly
favored’ by God. Notice what we find, in Luke chapter 1 and verse 28 – and we
are using the New King James Version…Now there’s one version of the Bible that
gives a different translation, and that is, the Douay version of the Roman
Catholic Church. It actually is a translation that is based on the Latin
Vulgate which was translated by Jerome…around the year 325, approximately. In
the Latin Vulgate it translates instead of ‘highly favored one,’ it translates
‘gratia plena’ which means ‘Mary full of grace.’ And the idea is that Mary is
full of grace and therefore she’s a dispensary of Grace…she can pour out and
give Grace to the people that come to her after her Assumption into heaven,
supposedly.”<o:p></o:p></i></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Let’s start off with the obvious and address Mr.
Bohr’s (and all other Protestants) misuse of the term we hear in Luke 1:28. To
begin with, the Greek term used here for Mary is κεχαριτωμενη, or <i>kecharitomene</i> - it’s the perfect past participle of the word χαριτόω,
or <i>charitoo</i>. As such, the perfect past
participle denotes the fact that the action has already taken place or has been
completed;<span style="background: #F9FDFF;"> </span>according<span style="color: #001320;"> to </span><a href="http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/charitoo.html"><span style="color: #45818e;">Strong’s
Concordance</span></a>, it has a possible meaning of “to make graceful,” or to “peruse
with grace.” Another interesting fact is that this word is <u>only used twice</u>
in all of the New Testament, once in Luke 1:28 and then the second time in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%201:6&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Ephesians
1:6</span></a>, which states:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">To
the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the
beloved.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">The Greek word for <i>grace</i> that is used here is translated as εχαρίτωσεν<i> </i>or<i>, echaritosen</i>, a direct variant of the
word <i>charitoo</i>. How interesting then is it that the root
word of <i>kecharitomene </i>is used
to denote the grace of Christ? Additionally, it is from the word <i>charis</i>, <a href="http://biblesuite.com/greek/5485.htm"><span style="color: #45818e;">which can also mean <i>grace</i></span></a>, that we get the word <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/charisma?__utma=1.1876831480.1356545686.1357141139.1357143338.3&__utmb=1.6.9.1357143974219&__utmc=1&__utmx=-&__utmz=1.1357141139.2.2.utmcsr=google|utmccn=(organic)|utmcmd=organic|utmctr=(not%20provided)&__utmv=-&__utm"><i><span style="color: #45818e;">charisma</span></i></a> and, for all of us
Catholics out there, this is where we get the word <i>chrism</i> for the 3 types of oils used in baptism, confirmation and the
anointing of the sick in order to bestow the Holy Spirit!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Much to Mr. Bohr’s credit, he easily nails the fact
that the early Church used the phrase “full of grace” as early as 325 A.D.,
compared to the New King James Version, which Mr. Bohr has chosen to use
Scripture passages from, and which was originally <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_King_James_Version"><span style="color: #45818e;">published in 1982</span></a>.
This not only gives weight to the historicity of Catholic belief, since the
Church has viewed Mary as being “full of grace” for over 1,680 years but, it
solidifies the relatively new view of Mary that Mr. Bohr is so intent on
portraying. Indeed, Saint Jerome did translate <i>kecharitomene</i> as “full of grace” when <a href="http://www.veritasbible.com/drb/compare/lvb:haydock/Luke_1:28"><span style="color: #45818e;">he penned
the Latin Vulgate</span></a>, and in doing so, he established what the early Church
taught, understood and believed when it came to Mary and her special role in
the economy of salvation. Mr. Bohr has no wiggle room here when it comes to debating
what the Catholic Church as ALWAYS taught in regards to Mary, therefore a
distinction has to be made: do we use a version of Sacred Scripture that has
been around for over 1,600 years (Latin Vulgate) from a church that’s close to
2,000 years old or, do we use another version of Scripture (NKJV) that has been
around for 30 years and in use by a Protestant denomination that has existed
for only 150 years?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Moreover, Protestant versions of early bibles
conclusively demonstrate that non-Catholic Christians of the 16<sup>th</sup>
century believed that Luke 1:28 was properly translated as “full of grace.”
Protestant biblical translator and theologian <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wycliffe"><span style="color: #45818e;">John Wycliffe</span></a>, who’s handwritten
English bible manuscripts was completed in the late 14<sup>th</sup> century, <a href="http://wesley.nnu.edu/fileadmin/imported_site/biblical_studies/wycliffe/Luk.txt"><span style="color: #45818e;">also
translated</span></a> <i>kecharitomene</i> as being
“full of grace.” Same with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Tyndale"><span style="color: #45818e;">William Tyndale</span></a> who is
credited with publishing the first English bibles in 1526. <a href="http://wesley.nnu.edu/fileadmin/imported_site/tyndale/luk.txt"><span style="color: #45818e;">His
translation</span></a> of <i>kecharitomene</i>, is
more in line with Catholic teaching than that of most non-Catholic Christian
bibles of today. Ironically, when King James authorized his version of the
bible in 1604, Tyndale’s version was one of the official reference materials to
be used for proof reading the text of this new version of the Bible!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Additionally, Mr. Bohr makes the audacious and bold
statement that because we Catholics believe that Mary is full of grace, that
she has become a depot of grace which “she pours out” to people who come to
her. This is an absolutely abhorrent view of what the Catholic Church teaches
about Mary as well as the communion we share with the Saints in heaven. No
other reference need be mentioned here as much as the Vatican II’s Dogmatic
Constitution document, <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html"><i><span style="color: #45818e;">Lumen Gentium</span></i></a>, which states
unequivocally in paragraph 60 the following (with <b>my emphasis</b>):<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">There is but one Mediator as we know from the words of the
apostle, "for there is one God and one mediator of God and men, the man
Christ Jesus, who gave himself a redemption for all". The maternal duty of
Mary toward men in no wise obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of
Christ, but rather shows His power. <b>For all the salvific influence of the Blessed
Virgin on men originates, not from some inner necessity, but from the divine
pleasure. It flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests
on His mediation, depends entirely on it and draws all its power from it.</b> In no
way does it impede, but rather does it foster the immediate union of the
faithful with Christ. <o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Properly translated, Mary can only bestow
Christ’s blessings because Christ - as the one and only mediator - allows it to
be so. Mary <u>DOES NOT</u> have the power, by her own accord, to give out any
sort of grace, blessing, merit or salvific action, only Christ has that power
and He can choose how, when, where, and through whom, He channels His grace.
The same is true for our communion with the Saints, </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p5.htm"><span style="color: #45818e;">CCC
# 957</span></a> (with <b>my emphasis</b>):<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">…we cherish the memory of those in heaven; we seek, rather,
that by this devotion to the exercise of fraternal charity the union of the
whole Church in the Spirit may be strengthened. Exactly as Christian communion
among our fellow pilgrims brings us closer to Christ, <b>so our communion with the
saints joins us to Christ, from whom as from its fountain and head issues all
grace,</b> and the life of the People of God itself.” <o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Therefore, Catholic teaching dictates
that Christ is the true source of all grace; Protestantism does not contradict
this self-evident truth instead, Protestants tend to LIMIT the ability of
Christ – as our one and only mediator – to use His grace through the Saints
and, more specifically, His beloved mother. The real question is not if Jesus
uses Mary, the angels, and Saints but, if Christ does have the ability to use
them to fulfill His will, why wouldn’t he?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Bonus point of truth</span></u><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">:
The first King James Bible, published in 1611, included all of the Apocryphal
works that so many non-Catholic Christians say are not inspired. If the bible
says not to add or take away (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2012:32&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Deuteronomy
12:32</span></a> & <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2022:18-19&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Revelation
22:18-19</span></a>) what does this say for those Protestants that exclusively use the
KJV?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><b>@ 29:02 – </b><i><b>“Now,
Luke chapter 1 and verse 30 underlines the fact that she found grace in the
eyes of the lord, she found favor, she doesn’t give favors…In actual fact, the
bible makes it very clear that there is only one who is full of grace and that
is, Jesus Christ. Notice John chapter 1 and verse 14…”</b><o:p></o:p></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">As stated above, when the angel Gabriel refers to
Mary as <i>kecharitomene</i>, it doesn’t
mean that she was filled with grace/favor at that moment because it denotes
that fact that Mary already had grace even before the annunciation. Therefore
Mary ALWAYS HAD this merited grace by virtue of who she was to be, namely, the
Mother of God. It wasn’t that she somehow “found” grace, because in Luke’s
Gospel, there are no works or actions that Mary had done - up until verse 30 -
to merit any favor or grace from God and, by solely that measure, we must
conclude that Mary already had and was filled with grace. It is precisely
because she was filled with God’s grace from the moment of her conception that
we can say she was not only impeccable but redeemed as well. In Romans 6:14,
Paul states:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">For
sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under
grace.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">As part of Pauline theology, this notion of grace as
a means of undoing sin abounds in St. Paul’s writings. Paul states repeatedly
that it is through the grace of Christ that sin is undone (see <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%205:17&version=KJ21"><span style="color: #45818e;">Rom.
5:17</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%205:20-21&version=KJ21"><span style="color: #45818e;">Rom.
5:20-21</span></a> and, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2Tim.%201:9&version=KJ21"><span style="color: #45818e;">2Tim.
1:9</span></a>). The same can also be said for death, in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Eph.%202:8-10&version=KJ21"><span style="color: #45818e;">Ephesians
2:8-10</span></a> we see that it is by the grace of God that we are saved. St. Paul continues
to repeat this message several times throughout the New Testament (see <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Eph%202:5&version=KJ21"><span style="color: #45818e;">Eph.
2:5</span></a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2015:11&version=KJ21"><span style="color: #45818e;">Acts
15:11</span></a> and, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Titus%202:11&version=KJ21"><span style="color: #45818e;">Titus
2:11</span></a>;<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Titus%203:7&version=KJ21"><span style="color: #45818e;">3:7</span></a>).
Therefore, if the grace of Christ removes sin and death, does it not make sense
that Mary – who was full of His grace (literally) – was entirely expunged of
sin and consequently saved as well? This is the point that all Protestants
ironically fail to grasp since most non-Catholic denominations claim to receive
justification by “grace alone,” or, <i>sola
gratia</i>. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">I say it is ironic due to the fact that this is
exactly the same means by which Mary, who was <i>gratia plena</i>, was compulsorily redeemed and perfectly chaste her
entire life. The concept is the same it’s just that most Protestants (as stated
earlier) LIMIT Christ to confirm to their personal beliefs in light of personal
interpretation of Sacred Scripture. Hence, if Mary did find favor with God, it
was from all time. And, if such grace preceded her birth, then one cannot argue
the fact that her favor within God’s grace was much more than that of any other
of God’s creatures.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Mr. Bohr states that the bible mentions that there
is “only one who is full of grace,” that being, Jesus Christ and goes on to
quote John 1:14. However, Mr. Bohr ignorantly omits – as he is prone to do –
that there is in fact one other person that the bible says is “full of grace.” <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%206:8&version=ASV"><span style="color: #45818e;">Acts
6:8</span></a> says the following:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">And Stephen, full of grace and power, wrought great
wonders and signs among the people.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Wait a minute, I’m confused! Mr. Bohr said that
“only one” person was filled with grace but, Acts 6:8 says that there is also
another person who is filled with grace, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Stephen"><span style="color: #45818e;">St. Stephen, the Protomartyr</span></a>.
Interestingly enough, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%206:7&version=ASV"><span style="color: #45818e;">just
one verse earlier</span></a>, St. Stephen is noted to be among the number of
faithfully obedient men in Jerusalem. Obedient, faithful AND filled with grace?
Smacks strikingly similar to the characteristics of Mary, doesn’t it?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Why would Mr. Bohr not mention this passage, that
there is in fact a human being that was also filled with grace? The reason is
simple, because if we can establish that a human can be filled with grace, per
the Bible, then we can easily apply that concept to Mary! This is the slippery
slope that Mr. Bohr does not want to tread on, because if a simple human being
can be filled with grace then how much more would Mary - who Jesus Christ chose
and loved from the beginning of time - have been filled with such grace? <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">In case there be any question about a “difference”
of grace in these two passages, according to the <span style="background: #F9FDFF;"><a href="http://biblesuite.com/greek/charitos_5485.htm"><span style="color: #45818e;">Greek Concordance</span></a>, </span>the
word that is used in both Acts 6:8 and in John 1:14 is χάριτος, or charitos. In
other words, the same word used to describe Jesus as being full of grace, also
describes St. Stephen as having been filled with grace. Therefore, when Mr.
Bohr asks at the 29:59 mark, “who is the one ‘full of grace?’” He is only half
right in saying that it is Jesus because the Bible also states that Stephen was
full of grace as well.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">@
30:12 – <i>“Another interesting
characteristic about Mary, is that Mary knew her bible, she knew the Old
Testament Scriptures…You can imagine Jesus sitting on the knee of Mary as Mary
reviewed the stories of the Old Testament which pointed to the Messiah…we find
very clearly that Mary had a very good knowledge of the Old Testament and she
shared this knowledge with Jesus…”</i></span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Mr. Bohr correctly states that Mary knew her Old
Testament Scripture – not “her bible,” he also correctly states that Mary
extensively uses Old Testament passages in her Magnificat. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">@
32:33–33:34 - Mr. Bohr waxes lyrical about the fact that the
Gospel nativity scenes are centered around Jesus and not Mary. <o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">As I stated </span><a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/12/throwing-down-gauntlet-episode-2-part-1.html"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">here</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">
at 7:06 (second paragraph), the New Testament is centered around Christ – not
Mary. There is absolutely no reason to think otherwise; this would be like
reading St. Paul’s letter to the Church at Corinth and being astonished that
Judas Escariot isn’t mentioned once in this epistle.<span style="background-color: #f6fafd; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">@
33:53-35:18 – <i>“Do you know that Mary also suffered with Jesus?...Some people believe
that Mary was actually co-redemptrix with Jesus, co-redeemer, because she
experienced suffering and agony…but does this raise Mary to the level of co-redemptrix?...” <o:p></o:p></i></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">See </span><a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/08/thowing-down-gauntlet-part-2.html"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">here</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">
at 19:34 and at 19:37. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">@
40:47- “<i>Mary did not understand the
Scripture that spoke about the Messiah…” </i><o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">This is a really interesting shift in Mr. Bohr’s
view about Mary’s Scriptural aptitude! Just moments ago, he commented about how
well Mary knew her Old Testament Scriptures but now, that Mary is confused as
what her son has told her, well, that’s because she didn’t know her Scriptures!
The fact of the matter is that Mary also “ponders in her heart” the meaning of
Gabriel’s visit in<span style="color: #45818e;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%202:19&version=KJ21"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke
2:19</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">
as well as in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%202:51&version=KJ21"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke
2:51</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">.
This doesn’t mean that Mary didn’t know her scriptures so therefore she had to
into deep contemplation as Mr. Bohr so succinctly put it - as he reads yet
another passage from <i>Desire of Ages</i> -
but, what this demonstrates is the Christian discipline to trust in God even if
you don’t understand what it is that He wants from you or is asking of you.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">And this is exactly
what Mary does: she doesn’t understand why/what God is asking or telling her
yet she remains faithfully obedient and trusting to God…all the way to Calvary.
This is the message behind Luke 2:51 and we see it repeated again and again
with the Apostles throughout the Gospels when they don’t understand Jesus’ words
or actions and yet, the faithful 11 stay with Him and are commissioned by Jesus
to authoritatively </span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 8.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2028:19-20&version=DRA"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">baptize
and teach all the nations</span></span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"> the new Faith that has been deposited in them.</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">@ 43:04-45:12 – Mr. Bohr describes the Wedding at Cana.<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">There are certain things here that Mr.
Bohr chooses to gloss over when it comes to the Wedding feast that Mary and
Jesus both attended. For starters, Mr. Bohr unashamedly refuses to take the
Gospel of John within its proper context. Ironically, of all of the 4 Gospels,
it is in the Gospel of John that we have certainty as to how Mary is to be
viewed; indeed, the Gospel of John reflects the view of the St. John the
Apostle so therefore, we have a more intimate look at who Christ is and, in his
first miracle, John explicitly tells us a lot about relationship between Jesus
and Mary.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In John 1:1, we read:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">This instantly harkens any Christian
reader back to Genesis 1:1, which states:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In the beginning, when God created the
heavens and the earth…<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Here we see John cleverly using biblical
typology. He is insinuating that, much like the creation narrative in Genesis,
here too we have a type of “new creation” or “new beginning” that God is
fulfilling and, a thorough reading of John chapter 1, gives us many instances
that parallel Genesis:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201:2&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Genesis
1:2</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, we see that the Spirit of the Lord hovered over the waters and,
in<span style="background: white;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:32-33&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">John
1:32-33</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, we take notice that St. John (the
Baptizer) makes particular mention that when he was baptizing Jesus with water,
the Spirit came upon Him.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201:3-4&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Genesis
1:3-4</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, describes how God created the light and
separated it from the darkness. In </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:4-5&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">John
1:4-5</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">,<span style="background: white;"> </span>Jesus
is described as the light of the human race which no darkness can overcome.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%203:7&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Genesis
3:7</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, the man and the woman use fig leaves to hide their nakedness. In
</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:48&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">John
1:48</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, Jesus tells Nathaniel that he saw him “under a fig tree.” *<span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">However, there are 4 distinct instances
that elude with 100% certainty to Jesus’ coming into this world as a type of “new
creation.” Specifically speaking, there are 3 different verses in the first
chapter of John, these being verses 29, 35 and 43, that directly point us to
the story of Creation. In John 1:29 we read:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him and said,
"Behold, the Lamb of God,</span> </i><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">who takes away the sin of the world.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In John 1:35, we are told:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The next day John was there again with two of his disciples…<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">And, finally, John 1:43:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The next day he </span> </i><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">decided to go to Galilee, and he found Philip. And Jesus said to
him, "Follow me."<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Do we notice anything similar in these 3
different verses that per chance parallel the creation narrative of the book of
Genesis? Of course we do! We can easily see that by John using the phrase, <i>“the next day,”</i> he is<span style="background: white;"> </span>mimicking the creation of days by God in
Genesis chapter 1! This is yet another parallel implored by John to draw his
readers attention of who Christ is and, as we shall shortly see, why this “new
creation” or, “new beginning,” is so important for the Christian to understand.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In the same manner that we have seven
days laid out in Genesis chapters 1 & 2, John also goes about laying out
seven days in the beginning of his Gospel. As I’ve already mentioned above, we
can see that John has laid out 4 days in the first chapter: there is a FIRST
DAY that occurs before </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:29%20&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">John
1:29</span></span></a><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">and then, a SECOND DAY
occurs when we first hear <i>“the next day”</i>
at verse 29. At </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:35&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">John
1:35</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, we again are told that there is another <i>“next day”</i> thus signifying a THIRD DAY, and then, there is one more
<i>“next day”</i> at<span style="background: white;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:43%20&version=NIV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">John
1:43</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> thereby denoting a FOURTH DAY. As we continue reading John’s
Gospel, we come to chapter 2 in which </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%202:1&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">the
very first verse</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;"> </span>reads as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the
mother of Jesus was there…<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">So what do we have? In John chapter 1,
we are told of 4 days in which the character of Jesus is slowly revealed to us
and then, at the start of chapter 2, we are told that, three days afterwards,
there was a wedding feast at Cana. Three days after the fourth day would be the
SEVENTH DAY, that is, the Sabbath. In Genesis the Sabbath is the final step of
creation in which God makes a Covenant with all of His creatures, thereby
making it holy, perfect and – most importantly - His. Suffice it to say that
the same thing is going on in the Gospel of John on this new seventh day that
John has laid out for us and, there is one big similarity between what John
writes and the book of Genesis when it comes to Mary.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">At the 43:22 mark, Mr. Bohr made
particular mention at the fact that Jesus called his mother “<i>woman”</i> when he said, “<b>he’s not being disrespectful, this was a
common way of sons addressing their mothers.</b>” Mr. Bohr is simply trying to
get away from the fact that this so-called “common way” of speaking, is
actually alluding to a higher purpose in the Gospel of John. One way that this
is illustrated is by the simple fact that NO WHERE in the Gospel of John is
Mary ever once mentioned by name, every time she appears she is always
addressed as <i>“woman,”</i> moreover, if in
fact sons calling their mother <i>woman</i>
was common, why didn’t any other 3 evangelists ever have Jesus calling Mary
women in their Gospels? Additionally, the name Mary is used 15 times to denote
women in John’s Gospel, second only to Luke who uses the name Mary 17 times. So
it wasn’t like John was a stranger to that name and yet, never once is it used
as a name for Jesus’ mother! <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The reason behind this is a simple one
that, apparently, Mr. Bohr either chose to ignore or completely dismissed. By
his current track record of the previous 2 posts, I’m guessing the former is
the case. The reason why Mr. Bohr chooses to reject the reality of why John
uses the term <i>woman</i> for Mary is
because at this Wedding feast, Mary is symbolically seen as the <i>New Eve</i>. Let me explain.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">From the onset of the Book of Genesis,
the woman of the creation narrative is never named she is only referred to as
“woman” or, “the woman,” indeed, Adam calls her woman because “she came out of
man” (</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=genesis%202:23&version=TNIV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Genesis
2:23</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">). It isn’t until<span style="color: #45818e;"> </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gen%203:20&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Genesis
3:20</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, after the expulsion from Eden, that we finally find out that the
woman’s name is Eve. If in fact John is attempting to depict Jesus’ coming as a
new creation or new beginning by explicitly setting up parallels between the
story of Creation and his Gospel, then without a doubt, Mary has to be a <i>New Eve</i> since we can clearly see that we
have 7 days and a woman in both stories. If Mary is the <i>New Eve,</i> then surely Jesus is the <i>New Adam</i>. As St. Paul tells us in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2015:20-22&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">1
Corinthians 15:20-22</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits
of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the
resurrection of the dead.</span></i></span><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> <span class="text">For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall
all be made alive.<o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In case there be any
doubt, </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2015:45&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">1
Corinthians 15:45</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">And so it is written,<span style="background: white;"> </span>The first
man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening<span style="background: white;"> </span>spirit.<span class="text"><o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Who is the <i>New Adam</i>? Jesus Christ Himself. Who is
the <i>New Eve</i>? Mary! Mr. Bohr <b>HAS TO</b> deny this parallelism because to
call Mary the <i>New Eve</i> is to give Mary
certain characteristics that do not conform with the SDA (nor Protestant) view
of Mary. Here are a couple of glaring similarities:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In the creation
narrative in Genesis the two primary characters are a man and a woman. At the
Wedding feast at Cana the only two characters named are Jesus and his mother -
not even the bride nor the bridegroom of the wedding are ever mentioned.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">If the first Adam let
the serpent convince him and the first Eve to sin at a tree. The New Adam fulfills
what the first Adam couldn’t do and He fulfilled it at a tree (the cross) </span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2019:25&version=TNIV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">with
the New Eve there with Him</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">If the first Eve was
set against the serpent (</span></span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%203:15&version=TNIV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Genesis
3:15</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">), then it is the New Eve’s
seed that is destined to crush the head of the serpent.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">As stated above, the
woman in Genesis is given a name only AFTER she has been cast out of Eden and
God’s good graces, by John not ever mentioning Mary by name, he is conscientiously
and purposefully depicting Mary as the antithesis of the first Eve.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">If the first Adam
sinned, then the New Adam, Jesus Christ, was sinless. In the same manner, if
the first Eve sinned, then the New Eve has to be sinless as well.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">It’s for that last
reason that Mr. Bohr intentionally doesn’t go any further than what the words
say in the John’s Gospel at the Wedding feast. Because if he were to dive
deeper into Scripture, instead of superficially reading words, he would HAVE TO
come to this conclusion and this is exactly the same conclusion that the Early
Church Fathers arrived to:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">…and that He became man by the Virgin, in order that the disobedience
which proceeded from the serpent might receive its destruction in the same
manner in which it derived its origin. For Eve, who was a virgin and undefiled,
having conceived the word of the serpent, brought forth disobedience and death.
But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy, when the angel Gabriel announced
the good tidings to her that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her, and
the power of the Highest would overshadow her: wherefore also the Holy Thing
begotten of her is the Son of God; and she replied, 'Be it unto me according to
thy word.' And by her has He been born<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">St. Justin Martyr</span></b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, </span><a href="http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-dialoguetrypho.html"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Dialgue with Typho</span></span></i></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> chapter 100, circa 150 A.D.<i><span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“In accordance with this design,</span></i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> <i><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15464b.htm"><span style="color: black; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Mary the Virgin</span></a></i> <i>is found</i> <i><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11181c.htm"><span style="color: black; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">obedient</span></a>,
saying,</i> <i>Behold the handmaid of
the</i> <i>Lord; be it unto me
according to your word. But</i> <i>Eve</i> <i>was disobedient; for she did not <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11181c.htm"><span style="color: black; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">obey</span></a></i> <i>when as yet she was a</i> <i><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15458a.htm"><span style="color: black; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">virgin</span></a>…
indicating the back-reference from Mary</i> <i>to</i> <i>Eve, because what is
joined together could not otherwise be put asunder than by</i> <i>inversion</i> <i>of the process by which these bonds of union had arisen;</i> <i>so that the former ties be cancelled by the
latter, that the latter may set the former again at liberty. And it has, in
fact, happened that the first compact looses from the second tie, but that the
second tie takes the position of the first which has been cancelled.</i> <i>For this reason did the</i> <i>Lord</i> <i>declare that the first should in</i> <i><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15073a.htm"><span style="color: black; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">truth</span></a></i> <i>be last, and the last first.” </i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">St. Ireneaus</span></b></span><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, </span></span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103322.htm"><span style="color: #45818e;"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Against
Heresies Book III</span></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"> para. 4</span></span></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> circa 200 A.D.<span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">…why is Christ called <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01129a.htm"><span style="color: black; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">Adam</span></a> by the apostle,
unless it be that, as man, He was of that earthly origin? And even reason here
maintains the same conclusion, because it was by just the contrary operation
that God recovered His own image and likeness, of which He had been <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14564b.htm"><span style="color: black; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">robbed</span></a> by the <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04764a.htm"><span style="color: black; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">devil</span></a>. For it was while Eve was
yet a <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15458a.htm"><span style="color: black; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">virgin</span></a>,
that the ensnaring word had crept into her ear which was to build the edifice
of death… As Eve had <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02408b.htm"><span style="color: black; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">believed</span></a> the serpent,
so Mary <a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02408b.htm"><span style="color: black; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">believed</span></a> the
<a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01476d.htm"><span style="color: black; text-decoration: none; text-underline: none;">angel</span></a>. The delinquency which
the one occasioned by believing, the other by believing effaced. <o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Tertullian,</span></b></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0315.htm"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">On The Flesh of Christ</span></span></i></a><span class="text"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">,
chapter 17. 202 A.D.</span></span><i><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“Death came through</span></i> <i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Eve, but life has come through</span></i> <i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Mary.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">St. Jerome, </span></b><a href="file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/JCA.JCA002/My%20Documents/and%20that%20He%20became%20man%20by%20the%20Virgin,%20in%20order%20that%20the%20disobedience%20which%20proceeded%20from%20the%20serpent%20might%20receive%20its%20destruction%20in%20the%20same%20manner%20in%20which%20it%20derived%20its%20origin.%20For%20Eve,%20who%20was%20a%20virgin%20and%20undefiled,%20having%20conceived%20the%20word%20of%20the"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Epistle 22</span></span></i></a><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, </span></i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">para. 21. Circa 400 A.D.<span style="background: white;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span class="text"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">Speaking of St. Justin, St. Ireneaus
and Tertullian, Blessed Cardinal John Henry Newman writing his</span></span><span style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span><a href="http://www.newmanreader.org/works/anglicans/volume2/pusey/section3.html#secondeve"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Letter to Doctor Pusey</span></span></i></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> in 1865 –<span style="background: white;"> </span></span><span class="text"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;">right
around the time of the invention of the Seven Day Adventist church - said the
following regarding the Early Father’s view of Mary as the Second Eve:<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“Now what is especially noticeable in these three writers, is,
that they do not speak of the Blessed Virgin merely as the physical instrument
of our Lord's taking flesh, but as an intelligent, responsible cause of it; her faith and obedience being accessories to the Incarnation, and
gaining it as her reward. As Eve failed in these virtues, and brought on the
fall of the race in Adam, so Mary by means of them had a part in its
restoration. . . . not to go beyond the doctrine of the Three Fathers, they
unanimously declare that she was not a mere instrument in the Incarnation… they
declare she co-operated in our salvation not merely by the descent of the Holy
Ghost upon her body, but by specific holy acts, the effect of the Holy Ghost
within her soul; that, as Eve forfeited privileges by sin, so Mary earned
privileges by the fruits of grace; that, as Eve was disobedient and
unbelieving, so Mary was obedient and believing; that, as Eve was a cause of
ruin to all, Mary was a cause of salvation to all; that as Eve made room for
Adam's fall, so Mary made room for our Lord's reparation of it; and thus,
whereas the free gift was not as the offence, but much greater, it follows
that, as Eve co-operated in effecting a great evil, Mary co-operated in
effecting a much greater good.”<span style="background: white;"> <o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">So, there we have it. Proof
positive from, not only a biblical stand point but a historical one as well,
for the reason as to why the Catholic Church HAS ALWAYS viewed Mary in such a
special light and as the New Eve which, therefore, makes her mother to us all.
This is why we as Catholics believe that Mary is our spiritual mother; The fact
of the matter is that when Jesus gives up his mother to His beloved disciple in
</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2019:27&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">John
19:27</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">,<span style="background: white;"> </span>right
before giving up His spirit at the cross, it is actually St. John himself who
tradition has it was the beloved disciple! How much more powerful does this
make Mary in John’s Gospel if he is telling us that Christ gave him His mother
moments before He died? <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Think about that, if Mary doesn’t have an
extra special place in God’s grand scheme, why did John, unlike the other
evangelists, even mention this? Why would St. John need to point out that the
woman of the “new creation/beginning,” is now his mother if not for that fact
that now she is in fact our new spiritual mother? Therefore, as modern day disciples of Christ,
He has commended His mother to be ours as well - just like he commended her to His
disciple close to 2,000 years ago.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Bonus
point of truth: It is from the view of Mary as the New or Second Eve that the
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception springs forth. For if Mary is the converse
of Eve, then it is only natural that she had to of never sinned, hence the
reason that Mr. Bohr didn’t go to any further into the Wedding Feast at Cana.
Additionally, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%209:31&version=KJV"><span style="color: #45818e;">John
9:31</span></a> & <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%204:3&version=NIV"><span style="color: #45818e;">James
4:3</span></a>, state that God does not listen
to those who are sinners or those who supplicate with wrong intentions,
therefore, by Mary requesting Jesus to do something about the wine shortage at
the Wedding feast, we have to arrive at the conclusion that she wasn’t sinning
nor was she presuming to wield “<b>special
claims and rights</b>,” as Mr. Bohr states it at the 45:54 mark, upon Jesus in
order to manipulate Him – as if anyone could manipulate God!</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">*</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 115%;">Although
the fig tree can be interpreted as a symbol of Messianic peace (see </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Micah%204:4%20&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Micah
4:4</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 115%;"> & </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Zechariah%203:10&version=KJV"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 9.0pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Zechariah
3:10</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 115%;">), the use by the evangelist aptly coincides with Genesis.<span style="background: #F6FAFD;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 15px; line-height: 17px; text-align: start;">End of Part 3</span></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9102213451567759312.post-13346884352841825252012-12-28T12:16:00.000-05:002013-01-11T14:58:21.620-05:00Throwing Down the Gauntlet: Episode 2, Part 2In the last installment of this <i>Throwing Down</i> episode, we went over several of the issues that the Seventh Day Adventists have concerning Mary. As it was noted, most - if not all - of their gripes with the Virgin Mother have distinct Catholic underpinnings which, try as they may, cannot be undone by simplistic, out of context and incomplete readings of Holy Scripture. We continue here with the second part of this four part episode in which we will analyze Mr. Bohr's attempts to do away with the historically accurate title "Mother of God" for Mary as well as trying to strip Mary of her all important place within Christianity by debasing and relegating her as just a simple, young woman who is nothing out of the ordinary.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen='allowfullscreen' webkitallowfullscreen='webkitallowfullscreen' mozallowfullscreen='mozallowfullscreen' width='320' height='266' src='https://www.youtube.com/embed/bRpmda1ILh0?feature=player_embedded' frameborder='0'></iframe></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">@17:45-20:21, <i>“Now a question that always comes up…is whether Mary was “the mother of God.” You say that sounds almost blasphemous…Mary was not the mother of God, because we know from Scripture that Jesus actually pre-existed Mary…John 17 verse 5…John 8 verse 58…John 1 verses 1 through 3…I’d like to read to you a very interesting statement that we find in the devotional book ‘Lift Him Up’…”</i><o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">It was a </span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05491a.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Church Council in 431 A.D at Ephesus</span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"> that gave Mary the title of Mother of God or, <i>Theotokos</i>, that is, “God-bearer” instead of Nestorian heretical term <i>Christotokos</i>, which meant “birth-giver of Christ.” The </span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestorianism" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Nestorian heresy</span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"> maintained that Mary only gave birth to the human nature of Christ and not the entirely God <u>AND</u> human nature of the infant Jesus. The Council Fathers stated that the term “Christotokos” separated Christ’s dualistic nature; 20 years after Ephesus, the </span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.dailycatholic.org/history/4ecumen1.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Council of Chalcedon in 451</span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"> would produce the doctrine of Jesus’ </span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07610b.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">hypostatic union</span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">, meaning that in Christ there are 2 natures – one human and one divine; this was later reaffirmed again at the </span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/2_council_of_constan.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Second Council of Constantinople in 553 A.D.</span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"> Take note that from the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. to Constantinople II in 553 A.D., 228 years had passed and there were still some heretical factions within Christendom that did not accept Christ to be “of the same essence” with the Father as well as wholly rejecting the Trinitarian formula!</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">By the year 431 A.D., the Bible had already been canonized for close to 3 decades, thanks to the early Catholic Church, and it was specially due to the misinterpretation of Scripture that led to the ecumenical council at Ephesus. Indeed, a reading of </span><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.monachos.net/content/patristics/patristictexts/34-patrtexts/189-nestorius-to-cyril2" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Nestorius’ Second Letter to Cyril</span></a></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> at the Council of Ephesus surmises this premise conclusively, for we see that Nestorius’ personal view of what the nature of Christ was - based on his view of Scripture - was what ultimately biased his take on Holy Writ. It’s a good thing that the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church was around to hammer out this basic Christian fundamental belief of the nature of Christ, right, Protestants?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Additionally, it took two Church Fathers at the Council at Chalcedon, Cyril of Alexandria and John of Antioch, to come up with what would be called </span><a href="http://www.dailycatholic.org/history/3ecumen3.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The Formula of Union</span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> which states (with <b>my emphasis</b>):</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">We confess, then, our lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God perfect God and perfect man of a rational soul and a body, begotten before all ages from the Father in his godhead, the same in the last days, for us and for our salvation<b>, born of Mary the virgin, according to his humanity, one and the same consubstantial with the Father in godhead and consubstantial with us in humanity, for a union of two natures took place.</b> Therefore we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. According to this understanding of the unconfused union, <b>we confess the holy virgin to be the mother of God</b> <b>because God the Word took flesh and became man and from his very conception united to himself the temple he took from her</b>…<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">As for Mr. Bohr’s statement that Mary cannot be the mother of God because Jesus existed before everything, Cyril of Alexandria wrote several letters to Nestorius in regards to his heretical notions and, in doing so, Cyril also addresses Mr. Bohr’s statement. In St. Cyril’s first letter, </span><a href="http://www.orthodoxunity.org/document02.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">written in 430 A.D</span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">., he says the following (my <b>emphasis in bold</b>):<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“…for the Scripture hath not said that the Word united to Himself the Person of a man<b>, but that He hath been made Flesh.</b> And the Word's being made Flesh is nought else than that He partook of flesh and blood in like way with ourselves and made our body His own and proceeded Man of a woman, not casting away the being God and His Generation of God the Father, but even while in assumption of flesh remaining what He was.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">Thus does the declaration of the exact Faith everywhere set forth to us, thus shall we find that the holy Fathers thought, thus were they bold to call the holy Virgin Mother of God: <b>not as though the Nature of the Word or His Godhead took a beginning of Being from the holy Virgin, but in that the holy Body souled with a reasonable soul was born of here, whereunto the Word united Personally is said to have been born after the Flesh</b>.”</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Plainly stated, the blessed virgin didn’t originate God the Son, she gave birth to the body in which God was inside of, </span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1K.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><span style="color: #45818e;">CCC #495</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> states this as succinctly and as simple as possible:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Called in the Gospels “the mother of Jesus,” Mary is acclaimed by Elizabeth, at the prompting of the Spirit and even before the birth of her son, as “the mother of my Lord.” In fact, the One whom she conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father’s eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly “Mother of God” (Theotokos).</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">What is even more interesting is that by making the statement that “<b>Jesus actually pre-existed Mary</b>,” Mr. Bohr unwittingly and stupidly repeats the words of Nestorius! For it was Nestorius himself </span><a href="http://mb-soft.com/believe/txc/nestoria.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">that declared</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">,</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“No one can bring forth a son older than herself.”</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">See how the enemies of the Church conjure up old heresies anew! How fitting that Mr. Bohr would use the SAME EXACT wording in our modern time that the Catholic Church condemned over 1,450 years ago. The most relevant fact about this heretical notion is that it is clear that even to this day Mr. Bohr didn’t learn the lesson from the Council of Ephesus as well as what the Catholic Church determined was the truth; as such, let me reiterate Christian history…</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The title Mother of God or, </span><i style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Theotokos</i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, was given to Mary </span><u style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">NOT TO</u><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> glorify her but, to glorify Him! The Council stated that the title of </span><i style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Mother of God</i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, unifies Jesus to BOTH of His natures. Mary DID NOT give birth solely to Jesus’ human nature, she gave birth to Jesus as both man and God so, therefore, when Mr. Bohr states at the 18:00 mark that, </span><b style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">“in the strictest sense of the word, Mary was not the Mother of God,” </b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">he is wrong because in birthing BOTH natures of Christ </span><u style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">she birth God as well</u><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">. </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">What Mr. Bohr is failing to see is that the blessed mother did not give birth to the eternal Trinity (God) but, she birth the second person of the Godhead; she wasn’t the creator of the Son, she was the conduit through which God the Son made Himself man. She gave birth to God the Son and, as such, is the Mother of God. To believe that God had a creator is simply foolish, however, to state that Mary is the </span><i style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Mother of God</i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, is to state that Jesus HAS TO BE both man via His mother and God via His divine origin. Therefore, the title given to Mary is an extremely apt reflection of who her Son is.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Moreover, to say that Mary isn’t the <i>Mother of God</i> is to take away – not from Mary – but, from Christ and his divine nature. For if Mary did not give birth to a child that had the nature of God, then she only gave birth to a human child, at which point we must ask ourselves: So when did Jesus become God? Did he “grow into” his divine nature? If it did happen after His birth, where does Scripture mention it? If Mary did not give birth to Jesus’ divine nature, then Elizabeth’s words in </span><a href="http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Luke-1-43/" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Luke 1:43</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, have no meaning at all. Nor would Matthew 1:23 make any sense when it states:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><i>“Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, ‘God with us.’” </i></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">other words, God is with us because a virgin with child gave birth to Him! </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Mr. Bohr attempts a semantics game at the 18:00 mark but unfortunately his attempt at convincing a smart Catholic that the proper title for Mary should be “God-man bearer” very perfectly illustrates why the Church chose <i>Theotokos</i> over 14 millennia ago: only by stating that she is the Mother of God can we really start to fathom the </span><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07706b.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">mystery of the incarnation</span></a></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> and truly appreciate the inseparable and unchanging nature of Christ when He walked on earth and as He is in heaven. St. John Cassian in </span><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf211.iv.vii.iii.ii.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">chapter 2, book 2</span></a></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> of his <i>On the Incarnation of the Lord</i>, written in the late 300’s, goes into great detail to set forth the proper view of Mary as the Mother of God, he begins by saying:</span><br />
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">…O heretic, whoever you may be, who deny that God was born of the Virgin, that Mary the Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ ought not to be called Theotokos…For no one, you say, brings forth what is anterior in time. And of this utterly foolish argument whereby you think that the birth of God can be understood by carnal minds, and fancy that the mystery of His Majesty can be accounted for by human reasoning…</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">And finally, another perfect example of this most joyful mystery that is the incarnation, is stated by none other than Protestant Reformer Martin Luther in his </span><a href="http://www.godrules.net/library/luther/NEW1luther_c5.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">1521 commentary <i>On the Magnificat</i></span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The “great things” are nothing less than that she became the Mother of God, in which work so many and such great good things are bestowed upon her as pass man's understanding. For on this there follows all honor, all blessedness, and her unique place in the whole of mankind, among whom she has no equal, namely, that she had a child by the Father in Heaven, and such a child.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">She herself is unable to find a name for this work, it is Too exceedingly great; all she can do is break out in the fervent cry: "They are great things," impossible to describe or define. Hence men have crowded all her glory into a single word, calling her the Mother of God.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">No one can say anything greater of her or to her, though He had as many tongues as there are leaves on the trees, or grass in the fields, or stars in the sky, or sand by the sea. It needs to be pondered in the heart, what it means to be the Mother of God.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<u><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Bonus point of truth</span></u><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">: Need further proof that devotional beliefs of Mary are firmly grounded in Christian history? The oldest prayer we have which refers to Mary as the Mother of God is called the </span><a href="http://www.preces-latinae.org/thesaurus/BVM/SubTuum.html" target="_blank"><i><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Sub Tuum Praesidium</span></i></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, which means “Under Thy Protection,” and was </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub_tuum_praesidium#cite_note-1" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">written around 250 A.D.</span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> It reads:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">We fly to thy patronage, O holy Mother of God; despise not our petitions in our necessities, but deliver us always from all dangers, O glorious and blessed Virgin. Amen.</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">@ 22:50 – <i>“Another interesting characteristic about Mary is that Mary was blessed…the bible does not say that Mary was the blessor. Scripture says that Mary was blessed…Luke chapter 1 verses 48 and 49.”</i></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">I simply love it when bible-alone Protestants use this passage due to the fact that they tend to go against what the Bible says in verse 48 when Mary says, “all generations will call me blessed!” I would like to therefore ask all bible-only Christians one question: Do you address Mary as <i>blessed</i> whenever you refer to her? Obviously Scripture demands you to do so, therefore, do you? At this point, I would like to state a simple fact: since the beginning of this video, Mr. Bohr has mentioned Mary 53 times and yet, never once, has he ever called her or refer to her as <i>blessed</i>; very interesting from a man who has set out to describe Mary using only the bible (and Ellen G. White) as his only source. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">I therefore pose the question: what Protestant churches have existed in <u>ALL</u> generations (none), and how many of them call Mary blessed with special prayers and devotions?</span><span style="background-color: #ffffcc; font-family: Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Strangely enough we crazy Catholics, who apparently don’t follow Scripture (according to most Protestants), tend to call the Virgin Mother as <i>Blessed Mary</i> in both our prayer life and liturgical services, talk about weird, eh, Protestants?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">@ 23:57 – <i>Notice that we are not told here…it says [Luke 1:42] ‘blessed are you among women,’ and for those who think this is some peculiar, special way of addressing Mary because she was out of the ordinary, this expression is used more than one time in the Old Testament…Genesis 30 and verse 13…”<o:p></o:p></i></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Mr. Bohr quotes Genesis 30:13 in order to see that Mary isn’t really “special,” unfortunately he totally misses why this term is used for Mary in light of the Old Testament. So let’s look at some other Old Testament expressions that Mr. Bohr didn’t quite get to and see how this translates to Mary. </span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P57.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Deuteronomy 28:1-4</span></span></a><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;"> </span>speaks about obedience and the blessings that one receives from being obedient to God, of specific note is verse 4 which starts by saying, <i>“Blessed be the fruit of your womb…” </i>When read in full context, chapter 28 talks about the many ways in which God blesses those who heed His word and curses those who abstain from it. But, a more illustrative expression that is also used to define Mary can be found in Judges 5:24, which reads: <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">Most blessed of women is Jael, </span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">the wife of Heber the Kenite, blessed among tent-dwelling women! </span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Easily seen here is that this verse parallels Mary in Luke 1:42 as being “blessed among women,” it is the following verses however, that clearly and explicitly point to the direct pre-eminence of Mary. Verses 25-27 speak of how Jael murdered Sisera, a general of the Cannanite king who was oppressing the Jews (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=judges%204:2-4:2&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Jgs4:2</span></a>), and of particular note is how Jael, who was blessed among [tent-dwelling] women, kills this tyrant. Picking up at verse 25, Sisera has fled into Jael’s tent after losing a battle, she promises to keep him safe at which point she offers him milk to drink in a Lordly cup:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="color: red; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">25</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> He asked for water, she gave him milk, in a princely bowl she brought him curds. <span style="color: red;">26</span> With her hand she reached for the peg, with her right hand, the workman’s hammer. She hammered Sisera, crushed his head; <span style="color: red;">27</span> At her feet he sank down, fell, lay still; down at her feet he sank and fell; where he sank down, there he fell, slain.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">If you don’t see a similarity here, then perhaps this question will get your brain juices going: Who was it that from the fall of Adam and Eve was destined to crush the head of the serpent in </span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://bible.cc/genesis/3-15.htm" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Genesis 3:15</span></span></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">? Was it not the seed of the woman? Who is the prophetic seed that will crush the head of the serpent if not Jesus? Thus, the woman who’s seed will crush the serpent has to be Mary. We can, therefore, notice at how Jael’s crushing of the general at her feet are a precursor to Mary’s seed crushing the head of the ancient serpent! Think about all of this and how the 1<sup>st</sup> century Jews must’ve reacted the first time they heard Luke 1:42, they would’ve easily known about the story of Jael and Sisera, of how she was <i>blessed</i>, how </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">she crushed a tormentor’s head and, of course, the Jews would’ve already been extremely familiar with Genesis 3:15. These early converts to Christianity already knew the typology involved and therefore were able to immediately see the pre-figurations of the Old Testament fulfilled in the new!</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Finally, the most impressive Old Testament verse is found in <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PD2.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Judith 13:18</span></a>, which reads:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Then Uzziah said to her, “Blessed are you, daughter, by the Most High God, above all the women on earth; and blessed be the Lord God, the creator of heaven and earth, who guided your blow at the head of the leader of our enemies.</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Uzziah was the king of Judah and he blesses Judith by telling her how she is blessed above all the women and he blesses her for beheading Holofernes, an Assyrian general who was about to destroy Judith’s hometown of Bethulia (see </span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PD2.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">v.4-8</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">)! So, once again, we see that Mary is foreshadowed here in the same manner as she was in Judges chapter 5. It is impossible for any of the early Christians to have escaped such similarities when posed with the character of Mary, they would’ve easily saw her as, not only the temple of the Word Incarnate but, as the most obedient and chaste creature that ever lived; the true handmaiden of the Lord who was far above and beyond any of the other women in the Jewish Scriptures.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">So sorry Mr. Bohr, Mary <b><u>IS</u></b> special in every way imaginable: she was chosen from the beginning of all time to conceive the birth of Christ, she was an epitome of what all Christians should be like, she saw and suffered for her Son as He suffered for us and, of the utmost precedence, she was the 1<sup>st</sup> Christian in all of history; for she knew, way before anyone, who she carried in her womb was none other than God Himself and she ,naturally, continues to remain faithful to Him unto this present day in His Glorious kingdom. To depict her as anything else is to mock God’s mighty will.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<u><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">Bonus point of truth</span></u><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">: How interesting is it that in Luke 1:42, Elizabeth praises Mary first AND THEN she praises Jesus? This is what the Catholic Church calls </span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=34033" target="_blank"><i><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">hyperdulia</span></i></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">, in the same way that Elizabeth hears Mary and then John jumps in her womb, we Catholics believe that Mary – through divine intercession – continually calls us to her Son (see </span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html" target="_blank"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Lumen Gentium 60</span></span></i></a></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">).</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;">@25:00 – <i>“Another very clear characteristic of Mary…is the fact that Mary is a sinner in need of redemption, in need of a Redeemer. In fact, we’re told in Romans 3 and verse 23 that ‘all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.’ …So if you read the Bible, if you read the New Testament particularly, you’re going to discover that there is only one who is exempted from sin and that is Jesus Christ…Luke chapter 1 verses 46 & 47, where we’re told very clearly that Mary needed a Redeemer, she needed Savior…I’d like to read another statement from the book ‘Desire of Ages’…”</i></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;">Ah yes, Romans 3:23! The deathblow to all Catholics who maintain that Mary was without sin! As it is stated, it reads:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">...all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God.</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 17px;">As I stated in Part 1 of this current </span><i style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 17px;">Throwing Down</i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 17px;"> episode, we cannot merely read the Bible and expect to learn the intricacies and beauty of God’s Word. We must dive deeper into the meaning and uses of words and phrases in order to truly grasp what is being said; to take simple cursory readings and apply them against Catholic teaching, as Mr. Bohr is doing, is a dead end. There is, therefore, an issue to be taken up here with the use of the word </span><i style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 17px;">all</i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 17px;">. In</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">the Greek it is written as</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">πᾶς </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">and is pronounced phonetically as <i>pas</i> (see </span><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/pas.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Strong’s #3956</span></span></a></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">). However in Romans 3:23 it is written as the normative masculine plural adjective</span><span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">πάντες</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">,</span><span style="font-family: 'Palatino Linotype', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">pronounced phonetically <i>pantes</i> and, it is also the same word used in 2 Corinthians 5:14 which states:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">For the love of Christ impels us, once we have come to the conviction that one died for all; therefore, all have died</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">It is also used in the same manner in 1 Corinthians chapter 15 verse 22:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><o:p></o:p></span><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">For just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life…</span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">Notice that in these two aforementioned verses, they both state that <u>ALL</u> have died. Now, if we are to use Mr. Bohr’s rationale, this <b>HAS TO MEAN</b> that every single human being that ever lived (before Christ) <b>HAD TO</b> of died. But, does the Bible support this claim? This is a favorite tactic used by Protestants to demonstrate that Scripture is at odds with Catholic teaching and therefore must be wrong. However, since I already went very in depth on this topic in my last <i>Throwing Down</i> series (see </span><a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/08/thowing-down-gauntlet-part-2.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">here</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"> @19:58), I will briefly reiterate the biblical proof that can be used to disprove that every single human, that is <i>all</i>, have died.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">To begin with, let’s look at Hebrews 11:5. In it we read the following:</span><br />
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and "he was found no more because God had taken him." Before he was taken up, he was attested to have pleased God.</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">In other words, Enoch did not die and yet was able to see heaven; because of the faith that he had in God, Enoch was translated into the presence of God and thus he escaped death (see </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=genesis%205:24&version=NLV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;">Gen. 5:24</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">). We see the same thing with Elijah in 2 Kings chapter 2 verse 11 where he is taken up to heaven:</span><br />
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></i><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">As they walked on conversing, a flaming chariot and flaming horses came between them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind.</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">So here we have 2 different instances in which actual living creatures were miraculously taken up to haven <b>WITHOUT</b> dying. For this reason we can, with biblical certainty, assume that the word <i>all</i> does not necessarily mean “<i>every single thing ever</i>.” Hence when Mr. Bohr says that “</span><b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;">all have sinned</span></b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">,” this likewise <b>DOES NOT </b>necessarily mean “<i>every single living human ever”</i> has sinned and, Roman Catholicism is the only religion that has always accepted this biblical reality to be undeniably true. As Christian history dictates, the early members of the unchanging Body of Christ also believed this to be factual, see </span><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://prounafides.blogspot.com/2012/08/thowing-down-gauntlet-part-2.html" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">here</span></span></a></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> @ 19:25 for a quick look at the historical validity of Mary’s sinlessness.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">The document d’être of Mary’s Immaculate Conception is none other than </span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9ineff.htm" target="_blank"><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Ineffabilis Deus</span></span></i></a></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">. Penned in 1853 by Pope Pius IX, this papal decree once and for all settled the case over Mary’s sinless nature that had began since the existence of the early Church, indeed, the document reads more like a historical analysis for proof of belief than a mandate for observance. Holy Mother church, imbued with the Holy Spirit, and speaking infallibly to all Christian faithful declared:</span><br />
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></i><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">From the very beginning, and before time began, the eternal Father chose and prepared for his only-begotten Son a Mother in whom the Son of God would become incarnate and from whom, in the blessed fullness of time, he would be born into this world. Above all creatures did God so loved her that truly in her was the Father well pleased with singular delight. Therefore, far above all the angels and all the saints so wondrously did God endow her with the abundance of all heavenly gifts poured from the treasury of his divinity that this mother, ever absolutely free of all stain of sin, all fair and perfect, would possess that fullness of holy innocence and sanctity than which, under God, one cannot even imagine anything greater, and which, outside of God, no mind can succeed in comprehending fully.</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">As for Luke 1:46-47, the Catholic Church has NEVER denied that Mary was in need of a savior. Although sinless, she was still a creature and a descendent of Adam and Eve. Therefore, as a human being, she was unable to save herself in any way and therefore needed her Son’s infinite merited Grace to save her. What the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception ultimately states is that Mary – from the moment of her conception – was instantly filled with so much of God’s grace that He not only removed the stain of Original Sin from her but she was also redeemed. However, the true cynic will invariably state that, since Jesus hadn’t died for us yet, it is impossible for Mary to have been saved beforehand. To which we must simply acknowledge the fact that Jesus has always been eternal; He, in all his heavenly glory, is not bound by time as we are…and neither is his power to save.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">So before she was, He was. And He was able to give His mother-to-be the gift of grace that led to a sinless life as well as the gift of salvation from the very instance of her conception. Additionally, just using common sense we must deduce that if a sinless God were to be formed in a humanly womb, that womb would have to be absent any stain of sin. If </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%206:19&version=KJ21" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;">the body is the temple of God</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"> then surely the temple that carried the Word would have to be as pure, innocent and unchanging as He who dwelt within it was. This thought of Mary as an undefiled carrier of the Messiah is prime in the belief that Mary was truly sinless, and no other title explains this Marian philosophy better than that of <i>Ark of the New Covenant</i>.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">The title of Mary as the </span><i style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">Ark of the New Covenant</i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"> clearly depicts why Mary </span><b style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">HAD TO BE </b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">the purest human that was ever created. As early as the second century A.D., we see numerous church fathers exclaim that Mary is the new “Ark of the Lord” and this is one of the things that most Protestants won’t readily admit - that there are HUGE similarities between Mary, as the New Ark, and that of the Old Testament Ark of the Covenant. With that being said, let’s see if we can flesh out the reasons from Scripture that make Mary the holiest wholly human that ever was.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">To begin with, let’s see some characteristics of the Old Testament Ark. </span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P26.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Exodus 25</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"> mentions the measurements of the Ark as well as the fact that the Ark is to be lined outside and inside with precious gold. </span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P2I.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Exodus 37</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"> speaks about its construction at the hands of Bezael. Indeed, the Ark itself was a treasure from God, it was the most prized treasure of the Israelites, for in it dwelt God Himself. Likewise with Mary: she was predestined to be the New Ark by carrying God inside of her and, in the same manner, Mary too remained “untouched”since the Ark and other sacred things were not to be touched nor looked at by the Kohathites (</span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P3I.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Numbers 4:15;20</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">), who were specifically in charge of caring for the vessels within the sanctuary. So strict was this edict that we see God kill off over 50,000 people who dared look inside the Ark in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%206:19&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">1 Samuel 6:19</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">! In other words, wherever God dwelt, was a special place, as seen when Moses was commanded to take off his sandals in front of the burning bush in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%203:5&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Exodus 3:5</span></a>. We also see the same thing in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=exodus%2019:12&version=KJ21" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Exodus 19:12</span></a> , before Moses goes up into Mount Sinai to meet the LORD, God tells Moses that absolutely no Israelite is to touch or set foot on the mountain under the penalty of death! </span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">But there are even more similarities, take for instance what was placed inside the Old Testament Ark. According to </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2025:16&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Exodus 25:16</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">, the tablets of God’s commandments were placed inside the Ark along with a container of manna (</span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2016:31-35&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Exodus 16:31-35</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">) and, according to </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2017:10&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Numbers 17:10</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">, Moses told Aaron to put his staff alongside the tablets of God’s commandments. All 3 items inside the O.T. Ark are also mentioned in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Heb.%209:4&version=NIV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">Hebrews 9:4</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">. So, what do we have inside the O.T. Ark? We have: 1) the 10 Commandments, 2) manna and 3) Arron’s staff, in other words, we have: 1) the Word of God, 2) the Bread of God and 3) a symbol of the High Priesthood. Is this not what Mary as the Ark of the New Covenant possessed inside of her womb? Did Mary not carry </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:1&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">the Word</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"> who was </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%206:35&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">the Bread of Life</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"> as well as </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%204:14&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="color: #45818e;">our High Priest</span></span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">? There is no way that anyone could deny this parallel between the two but, even if one were to, there are still other biblical typologies that not only lends credence to the title of Mary as the <i>Ark of the New Covenant</i> but solidifies it as such!</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">Take for instance the blatant similarities used by Luke in his Gospel when describing certain happenings with Mary. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ex.%2040:34-35&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Exodus 40:34-35</span></a> as well as <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Num.%209&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Numbers 9:18;22</span></a>, we see that God, in the form of a cloud, is covering or tarrying over the Ark of the Covenant; is this not the same thing God is doing in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%201:35&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke 1:35</span></a> when the angel Gabriel tells Mary that God will “overshadow” her with His power to conceive the Son of God in her womb? The parallel between the Holy Spirit overshadowing the O.T. Ark and the Holy Spirit overshadowing Mary - between the Ark of the Old Covenant as the dwelling place of God and Mary as the new dwelling place of God</span> - <span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">is explained even better in</span> <a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P21.HTM" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">CCC #697</span></a>. <span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">It states</span>:<br />
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></i><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">…The Spirit comes upon the Virgin Mary and "overshadows" her, so that she might conceive and give birth to Jesus. On the mountain of Transfiguration, the Spirit in the "cloud came and overshadowed" Jesus, Moses and Elijah, Peter, James and John… the cloud took Jesus out of the sight of the disciples on the day of his Ascension and will reveal him as Son of man in glory on the day of his final coming. The glory of the Lord "overshadowed" the ark and filled the tabernacle<span class="apple-converted-space">.</span></span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">In Luke 1:43, Elizabeth exclaims:</span><br />
<i style="text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span></i><i style="text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">“And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my</span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;"> Lord<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span></span>should come to me?</span>”</i><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Samuel%206:9&version=KJ21" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">2 Samuel 6:9</span></a>, after the Ark of the Covenant had been taken away from the Israelites in a battle with the Philistines and then it was later returned to the Israelites (</span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P6Z.HTM" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">1 Samuel 5</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt;">), King David went goes out to retrieve the Ark. And in 2 Samuel and in chapter 6 verse 9, we here David ask the following:</span><br />
<i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">David feared the LORD that day and said, "How can the ark of the LORD come to me?"</span></i><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">If this isn’t a clear and deliberate attempt by Luke the Evangelist to equate Mary as the Ark of the New Covenant, then perhaps the following examples in his Gospel are:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In </span><span style="color: #45818e; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Samuel%206:1-10&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">2 Samuel 6:1-10</span></a></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, the Ark travels to the house of Obededom in the hill country of Judea. </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%201:39&version=KJV" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke 1:39</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> has Mary traveling to the house of Elizabeth through the hill country of Judea.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 17px;">In </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 17px;"><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Samuel%206:11&version=KJV" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">2 Samuel 6:11</span></a> we read that the Ark of the Covenant stayed at the house of Obededom the Gittite for three months. </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%201:56&version=KJV" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 17px;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke 1:56</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 17px;"> states that Mary stayed with Elizabeth for three months.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Samuel%206:14-16&version=KJ21" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">2 Samuel 6:14;16</span></a> we see David dancing and leaping for joy in front of the Ark, in </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%201:41-44&version=KJV" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke 1:41-44</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, we see St. John leaping in his mother’s womb upon hearing the voice of Mary, the New Ark.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Samuel%206:15&version=KJV" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">2 Samuel 6:15</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, David shouts in the presence of the Ark. In </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%201:42&version=KJ21" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke 1:42</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">, Elizabeth “spoke out in a loud voice” in the presence of the New Ark.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">In </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Sam.%206:17&version=KJV" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">2 Samuel 6:17</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> we see the Ark returned to the City of David (Jerusalem) and it stays there until David’s son, Solomon, constructs the temple (</span><a href="http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P8K.HTM" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">1 Kings 6</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">). In </span><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%202:21-22%20&version=KJV" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #45818e;">Luke 2:21-22</span></a><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"> we see that Mary, the New Ark, is at the temple in Jerusalem.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">Based on this biblical analysis one has to come to the conclusion that Mary is indeed the Ark of the New Covenant and, as such, she is the prize of God and of all of us Christians in the same way that the Ark of the Old Testament Covenant was the prize of Zion and her children. And just in the same manner that the Ark was special, protected, valuable and undefiled so too is our New Ark in Mary; and since God never changes, she too remained special, protected, valuable and undefiled in her earthly life, and now, more so in heaven.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span><br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;">End of part 2</span></div>
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%;"><br /></span></div>
<!--EndFragment-->Pro Una Fideshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13906948702023796434noreply@blogger.com0