Jesus Christ Is Lord

That every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father!

Why Do Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, And Oneness Pentecostals Agree?

Posted by Job on May 13, 2007

Now Amos 3:3 says “Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” Now please note below how Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Unitarian Messianic Jews, and Oneness Pentecostals all use the same lies, and they all call true Bible – believing Christians apostates. (Incidentally, Muslims claim much the same.) Since they all agree on the same points and use the same exact terminology and historical/theological distortions and outright scriptural omissions, are they all correct? Or have they all been seduced by the same lying demons? It would be one thing if Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Unitarian Jews, and Oneness Pentecostals all had similar religions, practices, and beliefs. But they do not. Their religions, practices, and beliefs ALL WILDLY DIVERGE. THE ONLY THING THAT THEY HAVE IN COMMON IS THAT THEY ALL USE THE SAME ARGUMENTS TO DENY TRINITY AND USE THE SAME LANGUAGE TO DESCRIBE THOSE WHO BELIEVE IN IT. See below. So, you heretics, all of you rejoice that you have joined together in opposition to God’s Tri – Unity. Compliment each other on how you all are right. Join together, and respect each other’s beliefs, and be comforted in the fact that despite all of your differences, at least you all share THAT in common. There is no reason to push each other away! Come together. Sit at the same table! Break bread together, drink wine (or grape juice as it were) while you hash out your disagreements. Do not be “harsh” (as you accuse me) or “judgmental” (as you accuse me). Only God can judge, right? Well let me tell you something, all you people living in agreement of apostasy, God WILL judge, and the result of that will be your burning in the lake of fire forever. And it is my duty to warn you, and this is part of that process. Now I invite all of you to participate in this discussion, but in doing so please give a long hard thought about how you Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and unitarian “Christians” all manage to be in such agreement on so many things, and the implications of that fact.

This is the Mormon claim that the Tri – Unity of God is a lie given by Mormon VB in a comment: “A few hundred years after Christ’s departure and the death of his apostles there was a great division among the various churches and their leaders that had developed since and many Pagan traditions had snuck in to some of the various church’s beliefs. There were six years of disputation and frequent appeals to the emperor, but finally the leaders of the various groups came together at the Council at Nicea in 325 A.D. to try to come to a unity on the topic of various issues, the understanding of the nature of God among them. Various theories were put out there for review for the people to dissect and argue their points with great zeal and eventually settled on the Trinity idea. Kind of reminds me of the Senate and how they come to an agreement on an issue…you know, put in this idea and take out that idea, take a vote on it and if it doesn’t fly go after it again. There was no spiritual revelation to come to this conclusion. Just contentious rantings and then settling for this theory first, which isn’t the Trinity one as it stands today: “We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, creator of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, only begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of the same substance with the Father, by whom all things were made in heaven and in earth, carnate, was made man, suffered, rose again the third day, ascended into the heavens, and He will come to judge the living and the dead; and in the Holy Ghost. Those who say there was a time when He was not, and He was not before He was begotten, and He was made of nothing (he was created), or who say that He is of another hypostatis, or of another substance (than the Father), or that the Son of God is created, that he is mutable, or subject to change, the Catholic church anathematezes.” Then more rantings, shameful conflicts, clashes and arguments came about and this one was settled on as one of the symbols of the orthodox Christian faith: “We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost is all one; the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet there are not three eternals, but one eternal. As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreate, but one uncreate and one incomprhensible. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God; and yet there are not three Gods, but one God.” Well that’s about as clear as mud. It is obvious they weren’t reading the apostle’s writings and applying them to their conclusion. The simple doctrine of the Christian Godhead, set forth in the New Testament is corrupted by the meaningless jargon of these creeds, and their explanations. Later there was another change made by the Church of England that says “that there is but one living and true God everlasting, without body, parts, or passions, of infinite power, wisdom and goodness.” So what part of the Trinity idea do you ascribe to or do you have your own theory? The Trinity believers are definitely stuck on the three = “one” idea and taking it literally. Mark in the New Testament says that after Jesus’ ascension that Jesus “…was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God” Mark 16:19. If the Father and Jesus are one individual (excuse me, spirit in your view), how can they be seen separately when they are together? Then we learn about what the Prophet Stephen saw and experienced in Act 7:55: “But he (Stephen), being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God.” It is clear here that all three of them (God the Father, Jesus and the Holy Ghost) are very separate from each other. They each have their individuality but share a common goal and do different things to accomplish the goal. The short description of their purposes are: The Holy Ghost’s job is to testify of God the Father and Jesus Christ. Christ’s job is to glorify his father by doing all his father asks of him and the Father’s job is to be the Father of us all. When Jesus tells the people that he would like it if “…they (the people) may be one, as we (he and the Father) are” in John 17:11, does that mean that all the believers will literally become part of the Trinity? The Trinity would then need to be called the “Infinity” if that were the case. No, he was talking about one in purpose, just as he and his father are one in purpose.”

Here is Oneness Pentecostal Sue:

It is encouraging that more people are being made aware of the theology regarding the nature of the Godhead: Shema Israel Adonai Elohenu, Adonai Ehad. Some serious research into oneness theology versus trinitarian history would serve well. To deny the very essence of God by splitting Him up into three separate but distinct persons has been the nature of many false belief systems beginning in Babylon (Father, Mother & Child), Egypt (Osiris, Isis & Horus)and other Eastern religions that today have a Trinity, Hinduism (Brahma, Shiva & Vishnu) which is represented by a statue of God with three heads. Buddhism also has the doctrine of trikaya; the worship of a three-headed statue of Buddha. Is this three-headed “Christianity” any different? It’s the same polytheistic tri-God worship with different faces. Greek philosophers offered us the worship of the Archaic Triad when it was found necessary to reduce the number of their gods to three being Jupiter, Mars & Quirinus during the Roman Empire. This was later replaced by the Capitoline triad being Jupiter, Juno & Minerva. Plato was the developer of the Timaeus theory teaching that the number 3 was near diagrammatical perfections and based on this theroy furthered the concept. It was only natural in establishing Roman Catholicism that the intermarriage of polytheistic triune serving heathens would find it necessary to create a tritheistic godhead to serve as they became nominal Christians. The apostles understood that Jesus was God come in flesh (Isaiah 9:6 “….the mighty God, the everlasting Father…”) and to worship a second person in place of, or in addition to, God was to openly disregard the first commandment and the Shema.”

Unitarian Jew (who call Yeshua HaMashiach Messiah but not God) Baruch:

“Your message does not work! You know why? Because your form of writing is violent, harsh and impatient and very much not the way to tell your own beliefs to others. You judge people! The people who have a hard time to believe Yeshua was really HaShem have a point! There are lots of passages in the New Testament that tell He is not G-d. The thing is we have to believe He is the Mashiach and only Savior and that G-d is the One BEHIND Him, the One that works THROUGH Him. This means He’s not G-d in your way, He was a MAN (the NT tells this everywhere!)! There’s ONE G-d and ONE Lord and Mediator, the MAN Yeshua HaMashiach! The Trinity or Tri-Unity is from the Church and can’t be found in the NT nor Tanach. Thing is if you don’t believe that it was G-d working and speaking through the man Yeshua, there’s a problem! If you tell Yeshua was G-d, you have to admit that the Roman Church was right: there do exist G-dmurder and a Mother of G-d, G-d died on the Cross, G-d cried out to Himself ‘My G-d My G-d why have your forsaken me?’. This is blasphemy! G-d cannot die because He is a Living G-d, Eternally! His Son Yeshua died and resurrected by the Power of HaShem three days later! He was that Righteous that gave His Life for the World! Listen brother, I totally believe the Gospel and I trust the LORD Jesus Christ, Yeshua HaMashiach that He died and rose for ME and all people. There are however some texts you are citing that are not in my Bible nor in the Greek texts. For exampe 1 John 5:7 is made up later. Don’t you know that G-d told He is ONE (ECHAD)? That’s what the people have to accept rather than putting Him into boxes. People should know better. Believing that G-d is One and leaving mysteries over to Him is a better way than forcing people to believe in ‘the dogma of Trinity’. Didn’t He tell Moses to tell the people that ‘I will be that I will be’ send Him? Yes He did. This so clearly tells us not to put G-d into our own dogmatic boxes. Jesus also proclaimed the Shema (Hear O Israel, the LORD our G-d is ONE) as the first and foremost commandment. He talked about ‘My G-d and your G-d, my Father and your Father’, ‘The Father is more than I am’, ‘Why are you saying I’m good? For there’s only One that’s Good.’, etc.

I am totally aware that we need to accept the Gospel as ‘children’, but that does not mean that we do not have to study the Word. It’s not just about being guided by the Spirit of the LORD G-d alone. It’s always a combination of the Spirit and DEEDS/ACTION. Faith without works is dead according to Jacob. Did you know that everywhere where Yeshua and Paul and the others are talking about the WORD of the LORD G-d, they mean the Torah (and Prophets and Writings)? Read it, in Hebrew and find out more truths. You are actually telling me to believe your way, because if I believe like I do I will go to hell. That’s the christian way of evangelizing! I’m sorry, but you bother me with this a lot. As I started my posting I do REALLY 1000% believe that Jesus is my only Way and Savior (actually G-d is, through the man Jesus!), but some views need to be altered after such a long time in which christianity has been here, stating to be the only and superior religion!

May the LORD G-d Bless You Richly and you Grant the SHALOM of Mashiach Yeshua”

Now THIS is from the Jehovah’s Witness website:
“AT THIS point you might ask: ‘If the Trinity is not a Biblical teaching, how did it become a doctrine of Christendom?’ Many think that it was formulated at the Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E. That is not totally correct, however. The Council of Nicaea did assert that Christ was of the same substance as God, which laid the groundwork for later Trinitarian theology. But it did not establish the Trinity, for at that council there was no mention of the holy spirit as the third person of a triune Godhead. Constantine’s Role at Nicaea FOR many years, there had been much opposition on Biblical grounds to the developing idea that Jesus was God. To try to solve the dispute, Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea. About 300, a fraction of the total, actually attended. Constantine was not a Christian. Supposedly, he converted later in life, but he was not baptized until he lay dying. Regarding him, Henry Chadwick says in The Early Church: “Constantine, like his father, worshipped the Unconquered Sun; . . . his conversion should not be interpreted as an inward experience of grace . . . It was a military matter. His comprehension of Christian doctrine was never very clear, but he was sure that victory in battle lay in the gift of the God of the Christians.” What role did this unbaptized emperor play at the Council of Nicaea? The Encyclopædia Britannica relates: “Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, ‘of one substance with the Father’ . . . Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination.” ‘Fourth century Trinitarianism was a deviation from early Christian teaching.’ —The Encyclopedia Americana Hence, Constantine’s role was crucial. After two months of furious religious debate, this pagan politician intervened and decided in favor of those who said that Jesus was God. But why? Certainly not because of any Biblical conviction. “Constantine had basically no understanding whatsoever of the questions that were being asked in Greek theology,” says A Short History of Christian Doctrine. What he did understand was that religious division was a threat to his empire, and he wanted to solidify his domain. None of the bishops at Nicaea promoted a Trinity, however. They decided only the nature of Jesus but not the role of the holy spirit. If a Trinity had been a clear Bible truth, should they not have proposed it at that time? Further Development AFTER Nicaea, debates on the subject continued for decades. Those who believed that Jesus was not equal to God even came back into favor for a time. But later Emperor Theodosius decided against them. He established the creed of the Council of Nicaea as the standard for his realm and convened the Council of Constantinople in 381 C.E. to clarify the formula. That council agreed to place the holy spirit on the same level as God and Christ. For the first time, Christendom’s Trinity began to come into focus. Yet, even after the Council of Constantinople, the Trinity did not become a widely accepted creed. Many opposed it and thus brought on themselves violent persecution. It was only in later centuries that the Trinity was formulated into set creeds. The Encyclopedia Americana notes: “The full development of Trinitarianism took place in the West, in the Scholasticism of the Middle Ages, when an explanation was undertaken in terms of philosophy and psychology.” The Athanasian Creed Norwegian Triad Norway. Trinity (Father, Son, holy spirit), c. 13th century C.E. THE Trinity was defined more fully in the Athanasian Creed. Athanasius was a clergyman who supported Constantine at Nicaea. The creed that bears his name declares: “We worship one God in Trinity . . . The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God; and yet they are not three gods, but one God.” Well-informed scholars agree, however, that Athanasius did not compose this creed. The New Encyclopædia Britannica comments: “The creed was unknown to the Eastern Church until the 12th century. Since the 17th century, scholars have generally agreed that the Athanasian Creed was not written by Athanasius (died 373) but was probably composed in southern France during the 5th century. . . . The creed’s influence seems to have been primarily in southern France and Spain in the 6th and 7th centuries. It was used in the liturgy of the church in Germany in the 9th century and somewhat later in Rome.” So it took centuries from the time of Christ for the Trinity to become widely accepted in Christendom. And in all of this, what guided the decisions? Was it the Word of God, or was it clerical and political considerations? In Origin and Evolution of Religion, E. W. Hopkins answers: “The final orthodox definition of the trinity was largely a matter of church politics.” Apostasy Foretold THIS disreputable history of the Trinity fits in with what Jesus and his apostles foretold would follow their time. They said that there would be an apostasy, a deviation, a falling away from true worship until Christ’s return, when true worship would be restored before God’s day of destruction of this system of things. “The Triad of the Great Gods” Many centuries before the time of Christ, there were triads, or trinities, of gods in ancient Babylonia and Assyria. The French “Larousse Encyclopedia of Mythology” notes one such triad in that Mesopotamian area: “The universe was divided into three regions each of which became the domain of a god. Anu’s share was the sky. The earth was given to Enlil. Ea became the ruler of the waters. Together they constituted the triad of the Great Gods.” Regarding that “day,” the apostle Paul said: “It will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed.” (2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7) Later, he foretold: “When I have gone fierce wolves will invade you and will have no mercy on the flock. Even from your own ranks there will be men coming forward with a travesty of the truth on their lips to induce the disciples to follow them.” (Acts 20:29, 30, JB) Other disciples of Jesus also wrote of this apostasy with its ‘lawless’ clergy class.—See, for example, 2 Peter 2:1; 1 John 4:1-3; Jude 3, 4. Paul also wrote: “The time is sure to come when, far from being content with sound teaching, people will be avid for the latest novelty and collect themselves a whole series of teachers according to their own tastes; and then, instead of listening to the truth, they will turn to myths.”—2 Timothy 4:3, 4, JB. Jesus himself explained what was behind this falling away from true worship. He said that he had sowed good seeds but that the enemy, Satan, would oversow the field with weeds. So along with the first blades of wheat, the weeds appeared also. Thus, a deviation from pure Christianity was to be expected until the harvest, when Christ would set matters right. (Matthew 13:24-43) The Encyclopedia Americana comments: “Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.” Where, then, did this deviation originate?—1 Timothy 1:6. What Influenced It Triune Hindu godhead India. Triune Hindu godhead, c. 7th century C.E. THROUGHOUT the ancient world, as far back as Babylonia, the worship of pagan gods grouped in threes, or triads, was common. That influence was also prevalent in Egypt, Greece, and Rome in the centuries before, during, and after Christ. And after the death of the apostles, such pagan beliefs began to invade Christianity. Historian Will Durant observed: “Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. . . . From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity.” And in the book Egyptian Religion, Siegfried Morenz notes: “The trinity was a major preoccupation of Egyptian theologians . . . Three gods are combined and treated as a single being, addressed in the singular. In this way the spiritual force of Egyptian religion shows a direct link with Christian theology.” French Triune godhead France. Trinity, c. 14th century C.E. (1) Thus, in Alexandria, Egypt, churchmen of the late third and early fourth centuries, such as Athanasius, reflected this influence as they formulated ideas that led to the Trinity. Their own influence spread, so that Morenz considers “Alexandrian theology as the intermediary between the Egyptian religious heritage and Christianity.” In the preface to Edward Gibbon’s History of Christianity, we read: “If Paganism was conquered by Christianity, it is equally true that Christianity was corrupted by Paganism. The pure Deism of the first Christians . . . was changed, by the Church of Rome, into the incomprehensible dogma of the trinity. Many of the pagan tenets, invented by the Egyptians and idealized by Plato, were retained as being worthy of belief.” Italian Triune godhead Italy. Trinity, c. 15th century C.E. (2) A Dictionary of Religious Knowledge notes that many say that the Trinity “is a corruption borrowed from the heathen religions, and ingrafted on the Christian faith.” And The Paganism in Our Christianity declares: “The origin of the [Trinity] is entirely pagan.” That is why, in the Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, James Hastings wrote: “In Indian religion, e.g., we meet with the trinitarian group of Brahma, Siva, and Visnu; and in Egyptian religion with the trinitarian group of Osiris, Isis, and Horus . . . Nor is it only in historical religions that we find God viewed as a Trinity. One recalls in particular the Neo-Platonic view of the Supreme or Ultimate Reality,” which is “triadically represented.” What does the Greek philosopher Plato have to do with the Trinity Platonism PLATO, it is thought, lived from 428 to 347 before Christ. While he did not teach the Trinity in its present form, his philosophies paved the way for it. Later, philosophical movements that included triadic beliefs sprang up, and these were influenced by Plato’s ideas of God and nature. German Triune godhead Germany. Trinity, 20th century C.E.The French Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel (New Universal Dictionary) says of Plato’s influence: “The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. . . . This Greek philosopher’s conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions.” The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge shows the influence of this Greek philosophy: “The doctrines of the Logos and the Trinity received their shape from Greek Fathers, who . . . were much influenced, directly or indirectly, by the Platonic philosophy . . . That errors and corruptions crept into the Church from this source can not be denied.” The Church of the First Three Centuries says: “The doctrine of the Trinity was of gradual and comparatively late formation; . . . it had its origin in a source entirely foreign from that of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures; . . . it grew up, and was ingrafted on Christianity, through the hands of the Platonizing Fathers.” By the end of the third century C.E., “Christianity” and the new Platonic philosophies became inseparably united. As Adolf Harnack states in Outlines of the History of Dogma, church doctrine became “firmly rooted in the soil of Hellenism [pagan Greek thought]. Thereby it became a mystery to the great majority of Christians.” The church claimed that its new doctrines were based on the Bible. But Harnack says: “In reality it legitimized in its midst the Hellenic speculation, the superstitious views and customs of pagan mystery-worship.” In the book A Statement of Reasons, Andrews Norton says of the Trinity: “We can trace the history of this doctrine, and discover its source, not in the Christian revelation, but in the Platonic philosophy . . . The Trinity is not a doctrine of Christ and his Apostles, but a fiction of the school of the later Platonists.” Thus, in the fourth century C.E., the apostasy foretold by Jesus and the apostles came into full bloom. Development of the Trinity was just one evidence of this. The apostate churches also began embracing other pagan ideas, such as hellfire, immortality of the soul, and idolatry. Spiritually speaking, Christendom had entered its foretold dark ages, dominated by a growing “man of lawlessness” clergy class.—2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7. Hindu Trinity The book “The Symbolism of Hindu Gods and Rituals” says regarding a Hindu trinity that existed centuries before Christ: “Siva is one of the gods of the Trinity. He is said to be the god of destruction. The other two gods are Brahma, the god of creation and Vishnu, the god of maintenance. . . . To indicate that these three processes are one and the same the three gods are combined in one form.”—Published by A. Parthasarathy, Bombay. Why Did God’s Prophets Not Teach It? WHY, for thousands of years, did none of God’s prophets teach his people about the Trinity? At the latest, would Jesus not use his ability as the Great Teacher to make the Trinity clear to his followers? Would God inspire hundreds of pages of Scripture and yet not use any of this instruction to teach the Trinity if it were the “central doctrine” of faith?Are Christians to believe that centuries after Christ and after having inspired the writing of the Bible, God would back the formulation of a doctrine that was unknown to his servants for thousands of years, one that is an “inscrutable mystery” “beyond the grasp of human reason,” one that admittedly had a pagan background and was “largely a matter of church politics”?The testimony of history is clear: The Trinity teaching is a deviation from the truth, an apostatizing from it.”

Advertisements

212 Responses to “Why Do Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, And Oneness Pentecostals Agree?”

  1. Stephen K. Weber said

    With regard to your article, there is one more “cult” you might consider adding to those you’ve mentioned, CATHOLICISM. These folks pray on beads, adorn their church buildings with statues, sprinkle people with “holy water” (and baptize infants–who have yet to sin in their lives), put ashes on people’s foreheads, and use priests to conduct their services and to hear people’s confessions (I thought that they didn’t need priests since Jesus Himself became the High Priest.) They even believe in the trin… UH OH!!

    Now, here’s where I need your help. It’s known that, at the time of the antichrist, the false prophet will be the final “pope” to reign. He, together with the antichrist, will lead millions of souls straight to hell. I don’t know what your position is, but this, to me, is by far the most dastardly acts of destruction and “hatred” against God and his people (at least as much as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Mormons, and all the rest,) yet these people believe in the “trinity” (…I used to be a Catholic). I believe that anyone who associates themselves with a belief system that paves the way for this kind of destruction is in effect showing support for it. Conversely, anyone with a love for the things of God will stand against this kind of stuff.

    If we’re going to discuss what cults have in common, let’s discuss what ALL of them have in common, not just the majority of them.

    Steve

  2. Steven Weber:

    You know, I only found out about the Catholic Church’s teaching that the pope replaces Jesus Christ on earth (I thought vicar of Christ meant representative of Christ and not replacement of Christ) until last week; just 8 days ago, the same time that I was looking into why so many prominent Catholics were backing Mitt Romney and calling those of us who refuse “bigots”. So, they really do not believe in Trinity, because they stand in the place of God by their elevation of the pope and “Virgin” Mary into it. You can rest assured, I will be giving Catholicism more attention in the future. This thread was more geared towards getting Oneness Pentecostals to see the errors of their ways (and trinitarians to stop following oneness pentecostals like TD Jakes and Juanita Bynum just because they are on TV). I have to be honest; I gotta do a lot more research before I take on Catholicism, because I grew up in a tiny 100% Protestant town in the deep south and knew nothing about them until very recently. I have tried to go to some of their websites and learn a few things, but the stuff on there makes me go “you gotta be kidding.” If you have some information that will be helpful to me, let me know.

  3. Samuel Peters said

    Deuteronomy 6:4, Isaiah 44:8, I Timothy 2:5 and James 2:19 It’s not up to me to judge or anyone else for that matter because we are not perfect and that includes me yet we are all loved enough to know that love covers a multitude of sin even if we can’t find the strength to.

    There has been enough of who is right and who’s wrong to last a continuing life time when there is still work to be done for all.

  4. Samuel Peters said

    And the best part is we don’t have to be perfect.

  5. Susan said

    Is the word Trinity mentiond in the Bible?

  6. Cargil Henry said

    Hypocrite! Hypocrite! Where do you get did information from, that Oneness Pentecoastal and these demonic denominations have in common. Maybe you yourself don’t understand the bible and need clarifications; and a bit of information will enlighten your eyes and let some of your followers see the light.
    Oneness pentecostalism is unique and there is none so close to us than ourselves.
    God is One, and for God to communicate with his subjects, He must manifest to do so.
    If you understand this, rub out,wash out, your rubbish.

  7. johnkaniecki said

    Hello,

    I wish everyone a nice new year.

    Speaking on the three evil figures of Revelation is suspect.

    Anti Christ – Charles Manson
    False Prophet – Pope John Paul
    Beast – Ronald Reagan

    I know two are dead but the beast’s head was wounded.

    Love,

    John

  8. Rick said

    Wow, you people have nothing better to do. Just respect everyones personal beliefs and this world will run alot smoother. I am Catholic now and til the end. As far as see it, people that leave one religion for another, have a lot of soul serching to do (Mr. weber).

  9. johnkaniecki said

    Rick

    Hi hello. I certainly hope you are well. So nice to have your suggestion but I for one think that concentrating thoughts on God is a good effort.

    I wonder what you think of the Inquistition and the Crusades. These two things were done by the Catholic Church. They were horrendous crimes against humanity ranking high on the list.

    Now I respect your right to think how you do. I just can’t imagine that you’ve read the Bible a lot. Cause if you read the New Testament you would find many contradictions to what the Catholic Church teaches. But then again what would you expect from an organization that used to persecute and kill people for translating the Word of God into the vernacular.

    Was the world running so much better during the Inquisition of the Crusades?

    Alas I am concerned for your soul by the Love of God that dwells within me. To question God and people’s teachings about God is not blasphemy. It is a worthy and enlightening endeavour. Blind obediance on the other hand is not.

    Love,

    John

  10. John, we should not trouble Rick about past matters, when it is his present soul and what current Roman Catholic doctrine does to it that is the issue. (And you don’t want to debate the Crusades as much as you might think you do, but I rather we not get into that at the moment.)

    Rick, you seem to feel that we start off with a group and stick with it. Dedication is not a bad thing as a principle, however WHO we dedicate ourselves to is of great importance. If you desire to be a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, you do not desire to endorse the tenants of Roman Catholicism. Assuming when you say you are “Catholic”, you are speaking of being under Roman Catholic doctrine. Rather than “Catholic” in the church historical sense of the term, how it was used even before Roman Catholicism existed. Because in the later sense, I am Catholic and I totally reject Roman Catholic doctrine. So I doubt you mean “Catholic” in the later sense and will assume you mean the former (Roman Catholicism) unless you say otherwise.

    Consider the Roman Catholic Catechism. The guiding doctrine of Roman Catholicism. Catechism #969 says the following:

    This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation. . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.

    The Roman Catholic organization you appear to claim membership to has placed Mary in the role of making “intercession” and giving “gifts of eternal salvation”. This is in direct contradiction with scripture. Scripture being the Bible of 66 books. Never is Mary noted as being the things Roman Catholicism grants her title to. Jesus denounced veneration of Mary in Luke 11:27-28. The one who makes intercession and brings salvation is THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, not Mary.

    1 John 2:1-6 (King James Version)

    1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

    2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

    3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.

    4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

    5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

    6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

    Notice Mary is not given any reference at all, not regarding intercession, not regarding salvation, not regarding who leads us, not regarding who we should follow, not regarding who ALONE paid the price for sin and not regarding who brings salvation to the elect.

    The only other form of “intercession” noted in scripture is the work of the Holy Spirit, which works on behalf of Christ, in concert with Christ, as the members of the Holy Trinity are the One True God.

    Romans 8:26-27 (King James Version)

    26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

    27 And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.

    Mary’s role is done. She is not to be given any of the titles granted her by Roman Catholicism. Titles and duties that do not exists in scripture.

    Roman Catholicism has made her a de facto part of the Trinity, which creates a 4 person God, which is NOT God.

    Now Rick, you must ask yourself, what do you consider the final authority? The Word of God we have in the scriptures, or Roman Catholicism? If you feel scripture is where you gain your understanding and the final authority, than you would do well to relinquish association with Roman Catholicism. Stick to scripture being what you adhere to, place your devotion on faith in the Lord Jesus Christ ALONE as your only means to salvation, repentance and the only one who can present you to the Father as a child of God. Shun all who claim others can intercede and bring you salvation, because that is heresy.

  11. Charles D. said

    Rick: “Wow, you people have nothing better to do.”

    i SAY: and you? You could have passed on by, or, at least familiarized yourself with what is done here; instead of making a blind valueless statement of judgement, I might add.

    Charles

  12. Karl said

    Suppose that after death, those who calumniate the catholic faith realize that it is indeed the one and only true faith established by Christ, where does that leave you?

    In this life, we take out insurance policies to cover uncertainties. What could be more uncertain than what transpires after death? Now, given the length of eternity and horrors of hell, is this a risk you wanna take? Surely, a wise man endeavors to find out in which church he/she can be saved. You want to be absolutely certain that the faith you profess leads to salvation. Because of the length of eternity and torments of hell, one cannot afford to accept uncertainties.

    Therefore, if you have not gone to the source to dig up the truth, do not propagate lies. And he who refuses to acknowledge the truth in life will be forced to confront it in death.

  13. Job said

    Karl:

    Demonstrate to me using scripture from the Holy Bible that Jesus Christ created the Roman Catholic Church, an institution that did not even exist until after 600 AD and is completely different from the early church as described in Acts and the epistles. Karl, the primacy of the bishop of Rome was not even first asserted until 400 AD. Also, Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, and several ecumenical councils (including Nicea and Constantinople) all REJECTED the notion of the primacy of the bishop of Rome.

    Furthermore, show me in the Bible where Christians are to pray to Mary and the angels or practice iconography (I can show you where it tells us not to). The closest you will find is the practice of the Jews praying to God the Father in the names of Abraham, Moses, and similar or to practice iconography. Show me where the Bible says that church tradition can be used creating doctrines that oppose the Bible. You can claim that the reference to “binding and loosing” that Jesus Christ made gave the church that authority, but even Jesus Christ Himself did not transgress scripture when He declared Himself to be Lord of the Sabbath and delivered the woman who broke the law concerning adultery from the punishment according to the law (in part because He never at any point needed to do what the Roman Catholic Church does routinely).

    Roman Catholic dogma says that Jesus Christ created your church, but history disagrees. So does, for instance, the Orthodox church, who like you also claims apostolic succession (for the Bible tells us that Paul and other apostles established churches in the east, but as for the church in Rome the Bible does not even say who established it, let alone who was its bishop) which is why Roman Catholics cannot call the Byzantine churches (or the African ones) “Protestants” in any sense even though they, like Protestants, are not in communion with you and reject your pope, your canon, your icons, and a great many other things.

    So go tell the Greek, Russian, Turkish, etc. Orthodox churches that your church was the only one established by Jesus Christ. When you do that, come back and let us all know how it worked out.

  14. johnkaniecki said

    Independent Conservative,

    Hi hope you are well.

    Perhaps there is wisdom in not bringing every skeleton out of the closet. Yet, I recall one day I met a man in a used book store. He was seeking the truth. When I mentioned the history of the Mormons he realized he could rule out that organization as being from God based on their shady history.

    In this case there is to my knowledge no repentence. I do not believe that the Roman Catholic Church has ever said the inquistion was wrong. Any organization that could endorse such hideous torture does not serve Jesus.

    About the crusades I am a pacifist and I’m sure there is enough contention there for the two of us.

    There is the concept in James where it is said that a Christian would show his faith by his deeds. That is one person may say I have great faith but hasn’t done anything at all. Another may say I have little faith but he went out preaching and feeding the hungry and so forth. The same things apply to denominations. If we look at an organization over time and see that they have a good track record that speaks volumes.

    I’m a firm believer in repentance. Recall a man name Herbert W. Armstrong of the Church of God. His organization used to buy time late at night and show messages of doom and gloom. From what I understand the church has reformed and have gotten on more solid ground.

    Independent Conservative I see that you hold individuals up to the highest standards as teaches the Word of God. Churches too must meet those standards.

    Love,

    John

  15. John, speaking with a man who is wondering about a group versus a person who is in a group and in defensive mode requires a different approach. You should root your reasoning on doctrine, not what somebody long dead has done. Nobody living must pay for anyone’s sins that is dead.

    For every historical barb you can toss at a Roman Catholic, they can dig up a Protestant who has done dirt too. You only set yourself up for a mud sling that does not stay rooted on looking at the doctrine the person believes compared to scripture. It does not matter who killed whom long ago, but what the person you are addressing believes in their heart about God. Keep it focused on the doctrine that the individual you speak to believes. It’s about THEIR HEART, not them feeling sorry for what someone who they won’t bear burden for once did, to people before our time. Whether or not someone knows an Inquisition ever existed has NO BEARING on their soul, it was NOT their sin and we should not place at someone’s feet what God has not placed on them either. God won’t judge Rick for the Crusades or Inquisition. And guess what, He won’t judge Benedict for that either. However, if Rick feels Mary is able to intercede for him and looking to Mary for hope, as is documented Catholic doctrine, he’s going to have a major problem at judgment.

    It would be best to have this discussion at another time.

    Root your debate on someone’s accepted doctrine compared with scripture, not dead people, unless those dead people are revered by the group today as people they personally follow.

    Herbert W. Armstrong’s group changed their doctrine, (now they are known as the Worldwide Church of God) however they have come into new issues. I don’t know if you’ve actually worshiped with any of them, but I have since the change, to see how things were going. There is now a strong Universalist wing in their ranks now and it’s growing like a sick cancer. They’ve gone from legalism to turning grace into an “everybody is going to heaven” claim in some of their assembly. And the leaders of the group are not fighting it much, because now too many of their leaders ARE Universalists. So they are a group that still needs prayer. Their overall doctrine has not gone to all out Universalism yet, but there is a faction that has not been rebuked, is growing in number and awaiting when they have the numbers to invoke overall doctrinal changes. They’ve already got some pull higher up in the group.

    You can see their paper on Hell does not clearly stand on damnation being eternal. They waffle on the matter and speak of it being an issue that can be looked at different ways. This is done to please the Universalist in their ranks.

  16. Karl said

    Job,

    The Church is that visible society founded by Jesus Christ, guaranteed to exist all days until the end of the world, and sent by Him to teach all nations with His own authority. Its members are united by,

    i – profession of the same and complete Christian faith
    ii – the same Sacraments and worship
    iii – submission to the same spiritual authority vested in the successors of St. Peter

    Christ left the adoption of a name for His Church to those whom He commissioned to teach all nations. Christ referred to the spiritual society He established as, My Church (Mt. xvi, 18), the Church (Mt. xviii, 17).

    In order to make a distinction between the Church and the Synagogue and to have a distinguishing name from those embracing Judaic and Protestant errors St. Ignatius (50-107 A.D.) used the Greek word Katholicos to describe the universality of the Church established by Christ. St Ignatius was appointed Bishop of Antioch by St Peter, the Bishop of Rome. It is in his writings that we find the word Catholic used for the first time. St Augustine, when speaking about the Church of Christ, calls it the Catholic Church 240 times in his writings. Your claim that Saints Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, and several ecumenical councils all REJECTED the notion of the primacy of the bishop of Rome is a lie, designed to calumniate the Catholic Church.

    Concerning your second objection, Luke 1:26 gives a clear insight into the Catholic position on the Virgin Mary. Mary was greeted as being full of grace, this was even before she conceived of the Holy Ghost to give birth to Christ, this is because God had persevered her in Holiness in order to full fill his Holy Will.

    Now, if you who are an imperfect being and who have not the most delicate Conception of all that is fine in life would have wished for the loveliest of mothers, do you think that our Blessed Lord, who not only pre-existed His own mother, but who had an infinite power to make her just what He chose, would, in virtue of all the infinite delicacy of His spirit make her any less pure and loving and beautiful than you would have made your own mother? If you who hate selfishness, would have made her selfless, and you who hate ugliness, would have made her beautiful, do you not think that the Son of God who hates sin would have made His own mother sinless, and He who hates moral ugliness, would have made her immaculately beautiful? Furthermore for anyone to be obedient to the words of the Gospel, it is clear that henceforth all those who live in future time will proclaim the Mother of God as blessed. After the Blessed Trinity and Christ’s human nature, Mary holds the highest degree of purity (sanctity). According to Webster’s International Dictionary 2nd Edition, GRACE means: A STATE WITHOUT SIN. Also Luke 1:39 says,

    …For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed..

    GOD Our Father, especially honored Mary by choosing Her to be the Mother of His Son, therefore Catholics too, in imitation of God, honor and venerate Mary in the special role to which She has been chosen. Jesus existed before His Mother (John 1:1) and so He prepared Her. GOD chose the Woman (Mary) that would suit Him best, and so it was GOD’s choice that Mary is best for Him.

    They that serve Her shall be servants to the Holy One; and GOD loves them that love Her – Ecclesiasticus 4:15

    For She is a vapor of the power of GOD, and a certain pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty GOD; and therefore no defiled thing comes into Her. For She is the brightness of Eternal Light, and the unspotted mirrorof GOD’s Majesty, and the image of His Goodness – Wisdom 7:26

    Rule you over us, you and your Son – Judges 8:22

    for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden. For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed – Luke 1:48

    No one will ever be servant of the Son without serving the Mother – St Ildephonsus 667 AD

    To those who despise the mother of God, St John Damascene (Doctor of the Church – 749 AD) warns,

    Those who Do not serve Mary Will not be saved, for those who are deprived of the help of this great Mother are deprived also of that of Her Son and of the Whole Court of Heaven.

    Protestants are unaware of this, but even the Protestant Reformers themselves – Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Ulrich Zwingli – honored the perpetual virginity of Mary and recognized it as the teaching of the Bible, as have more modern Protestants, such as the biblical and patristics scholar J. B. Lightfoot.

    Finally, in your third objection, you state that history disagrees that the Catholic Church was established by Christ. This again is a lie. That the Catholic Church is the Church established by Jesus Christ is a fact clearly proven by Scripture and by history. The Jews, and Gentiles bear witness. Even Protestants acknowledge this fact. Otherwise against whom would they be protesting, if it were not against the Catholic Church.

    You shamelessly lie, again, when you say that that the Greek Orthodox Church disagrees. The Greek Orthodox Church began by separating from the Catholic Church in the 9th Century. It follows that the Catholic Church existed for 800 years before the Greek Church. In fact, every sect separated from the Catholic Church; Lutherans, Calvinists, Anglicans, Quakers, Shakers, Seekers, Episcopalians, Reformed Methodists, German Methodists, Wesleyan Methodists, Baptists, Anabaptists, Mennonites, Millerites, Universalists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Mormons, Christian Perfectionists, Pentecostal, United Unitarian Universalist Association, German Reformed, Perfectionist, Adventist, Seventh-Day Adventist, Salvation Army, Christian Scientist, Old Catholics, New Age, Dowietes, Jehovah’s Witness, Holiness Churches…. etc

  17. Karl said

    Job,

    The Church is that visible society founded by Jesus Christ, guaranteed to exist all days until the end of the world, and sent by Him to teach all nations with His own authority. Its members are united by,

    i – profession of the same and complete Christian faith
    ii – the same Sacraments and worship
    iii – submission to the same spiritual authority vested in the successors of St. Peter

    Christ left the adoption of a name for His Church to those whom He commissioned to teach all nations. Christ referred to the spiritual society He established as, My Church (Mt. xvi, 18), the Church (Mt. xviii, 17).

    In order to make a distinction between the Church and the Synagogue and to have a distinguishing name from those embracing Judaic and Protestant errors St. Ignatius (50-107 A.D.) used the Greek word Katholicos to describe the universality of the Church established by Christ. St Ignatius was appointed Bishop of Antioch by St Peter, the Bishop of Rome. It is in his writings that we find the word Catholic used for the first time. St Augustine, when speaking about the Church of Christ, calls it the Catholic Church 240 times in his writings. Your claim that Saints Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, and several ecumenical councils all REJECTED the notion of the primacy of the bishop of Rome is a lie, designed to calumniate the Catholic Church.

    Concerning your second objection, Luke 1:26 gives a clear insight into the Catholic position on the Virgin Mary. Mary was greeted as being full of grace, this was even before she conceived of the Holy Ghost to give birth to Christ, this is because God had persevered her in Holiness in order to full fill his Holy Will.

    Now, if you who are an imperfect being and who have not the most delicate Conception of all that is fine in life would have wished for the loveliest of mothers, do you think that our Blessed Lord, who not only pre-existed His own mother, but who had an infinite power to make her just what He chose, would, in virtue of all the infinite delicacy of His spirit make her any less pure and loving and beautiful than you would have made your own mother? If you who hate selfishness, would have made her selfless, and you who hate ugliness, would have made her beautiful, do you not think that the Son of God who hates sin would have made His own mother sinless, and He who hates moral ugliness, would have made her immaculately beautiful? Furthermore for anyone to be obedient to the words of the Gospel, it is clear that henceforth all those who live in future time will proclaim the Mother of God as blessed. After the Blessed Trinity and Christ’s human nature, Mary holds the highest degree of purity (sanctity). According to Webster’s International Dictionary 2nd Edition, GRACE means: A STATE WITHOUT SIN. Also Luke 1:39 says,

    …For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed..

    GOD Our Father, especially honored Mary by choosing Her to be the Mother of His Son, therefore Catholics too, in imitation of God, honor and venerate Mary in the special role to which She has been chosen. Jesus existed before His Mother (John 1:1) and so He prepared Her. GOD chose the Woman (Mary) that would suit Him best, and so it was GOD’s choice that Mary is best for Him.

    They that serve Her shall be servants to the Holy One; and GOD loves them that love Her – Ecclesiasticus 4:15

    For She is a vapor of the power of GOD, and a certain pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty GOD; and therefore no defiled thing comes into Her. For She is the brightness of Eternal Light, and the unspotted mirrorof GOD’s Majesty, and the image of His Goodness – Wisdom 7:26

    Rule you over us, you and your Son – Judges 8:22

    for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden. For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed – Luke 1:48

    No one will ever be servant of the Son without serving the Mother – St Ildephonsus 667 AD

    To those who despise the mother of God, St John Damascene (Doctor of the Church – 749 AD) warns,

    Those who Do not serve Mary Will not be saved, for those who are deprived of the help of this great Mother are deprived also of that of Her Son and of the Whole Court of Heaven.

    Protestants are unaware of this, but even the Protestant Reformers themselves – Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Ulrich Zwingli – honored the perpetual virginity of Mary and recognized it as the teaching of the Bible, as have more modern Protestants, such as the biblical and patristics scholar J. B. Lightfoot.

    Finally, in your third objection, you state that history disagrees that the Catholic Church was established by Christ. This again is a lie. That the Catholic Church is the Church established by Jesus Christ is a fact clearly proven by Scripture and by history. The Jews, and Gentiles bear witness. Even Protestants acknowledge this fact. Otherwise against whom would they be protesting, if it were not against the Catholic Church.

    You shamelessly lie, again, when you say that that the Greek Orthodox Church disagrees. The Greek Orthodox Church began by separating from the Catholic Church in the 9th Century. It follows that the Catholic Church existed for 800 years before the Greek Church. In fact, every sect separated from the Catholic Church; Lutherans, Calvinists, Anglicans, Quakers, Shakers, Seekers, Episcopalians, Reformed Methodists, German Methodists, Wesleyan Methodists, Baptists, Anabaptists, Mennonites, Millerites, Universalists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Mormons, Christian Perfectionists, Pentecostal, United Unitarian Universalist Association, German Reformed, Perfectionist, Adventist, Seventh-Day Adventist, Salvation Army, Christian Scientist, Old Catholics, New Age, Dowietes, Jehovah’s Witness, Holiness Churches…. etc

  18. Eden Hadassah said

    Karl,
    From what I have read of your posts, it seems to me every one that has left the catholic church obviously did so for good reason. You give a long list of different organizations that for what ever reason could not be joined to the catholic church. AND, it would also seem to me that of the list that you provided(according to you), has cults too.
    Are you proud of the fact that all these people left? Or that the foundation FIRST was in the catholic church, and THEN some went forward in cultism? Not to mention the countless many beautiful people that actually chose to pick up their bible and take it to heart, being convicted by the Holy Spirit and left to find true joy and spiritual fulfillment in Christ.
    Your statement about perpetual virginity of Mary is an out right lie and you know it. She bore children after Jesus. When will you stop following the traditions of men? It doesn’t merit you to say such things.
    Since you are so up on church history, it is funny that you would not mention who really controls the catholic church and her money. You know a lot about ancient history (by what you have been taught, because obviously you didn’t witness it first hand) but are you up to date on who usurped the inner circle of the catholic church?
    Do some research friend.

  19. Any human (except Christ who is the God-man) that has grace was granted it because they were in sin, Mary included.

    The Apocrypha is NOT scripture. Someone show me where Jesus or any apostle affirmed the Apocrypha by quoting the Apocrypha at all IN SCRIPTURE? Scripture affirms its self because Christ and the apostles quoted freely from it, apostles even affirmed each others epistles, but they did not quote the Apocrypha AT ALL. Because the Apocrypha is NOT scripture.

    Karl likes quoting the words of men and other writing that is NOT scripture, but his position on Mary is NOT in scripture.

    Karl you’ve done a Roman Catholic styled hatchet job on Judges 8:22.

    Judges 8:22-23 (King James Version)

    22 Then the men of Israel said unto Gideon, Rule thou over us, both thou, and thy son, and thy son’s son also: for thou hast delivered us from the hand of Midian.

    23 And Gideon said unto them, I will not rule over you, neither shall my son rule over you: the LORD shall rule over you.

    Notice Mary is NOT at all who Judges 8:22 is talking about and the “son” mentioned is not Christ.

    Roman Catholicism Versus The Bible. As Always, Bible Wins! (*Updated*)

    Demonic Mary Apparitions Decieve Roman Catholics

  20. Karl said

    Protestantism which began in the year 1517, initially had only one follower, Luther. The voice of this man was the only discordant sound that was heard in western Christendom. Till then, all had been united in the harmony of one belief. Although scandal existed then, as now, and abuses of individual living were known, although public and private morals might have furnished much ground for complaint, there was one central rallying point on which men’s minds were united. And that was the beauty, simplicity, and Unity of the faith of the Catholic Church which God had established for the salvation of men.

    Four years later, Munzer, founded a second rapidly anti-catholic sect known as the Anabaptists, then Zwinglius, Calvin, and King Henry VIII followed suit. By 1600 there were about 100. In 1900 there were 1000. By 1981 there were 22,000. In 2003, over 36,400 were counted. All founded by mere human men or women. Who gave them the authority to do so? Protestant sects, as they become more numerous, are also becoming smaller and smaller. Do the calculations and you will see that driven to its logical conclusion there can be as many sects as individuals.

    Dudithius, a learned Protestant divine, in his epistle to Beza, wrote:

    What sort of people are our Protestants, straggling to and fro, and carried about by every wind of doctrine, sometimes to this side, sometimes to that? You may, perhaps, know what their sentiments in matters of religion are to-day, but you can never tell precisely what they will be to-morrow. In what article of religion do these churches agree which have cast off the Bishop of Rome? Examine all from top to bottom, and you will scarce find one thing affirmed by one which was not immediately condemned by another for wicked doctrine.

    An English Protestant, the learned Dr. Walton, about the middle of the 18th century, wrote:

    Aristarchus could scarce find seven wise men in Greece; but with us, scarce are to be found so many idiots. For all are doctors, all are divinely learned: there is not so much as the meanest fanatic who does not give you his own dreams for the word of God. The bottomless pit seems to have been opened, from whence a smoke has arisen which has darkened the heavens and the stars, and locusts have come out with stings, a numerous race of sectaries and heretics, who have renewed all the ancient heresies, and invented many monstrous opinions of their own. These have filled our cities, villages, camps, houses, nay, our pulpits, too, and lead the poor deluded people, with them to the pit of perdition.

    Another author wrote,

    every ten years, or nearly so, the Protestant theological literature undergoes a complete revolution. What was admired during the one decennial period is rejected in the next, and the image which they adored is burnt, to make way for new divinities; the dogmas which were held in honor, fall into discredit; the classical treatise of morality is banished among the old books out of date; criticism overturns criticism; the commentary of yesterday ridicules that of the previous day, and what was clearly proved in 1840, is not less clearly disproved in 1850. The theological systems of Protestantism are as numerous as the political constitutions of France–one revolution only awaits another. – (Le Semeur, June, 1840)

    It is indeed utterly impossible to keep the various members of one single sect from perpetual disputes, even about the essential truths of revealed religion. And those religious differences exist not only in the same sect, not only in the same country and town, but even in the same family. Nay, the self-same individual, at different periods of his life, is often in flagrant contradiction with himself. Today he avows opinions which yesterday he abhorred, and tomorrow he will exchange these again for new ones. At last, after belonging, successively, to various new-fangled sects, he generally ends by professing unmitigated contempt for them all. By their continual disputes and bickering, and dividing and subdividing, the various Protestant sects have are veritable laughing stock.

    These human sects, the works of the flesh, as St. Paul calls them, alter their shape, like clouds. They fight a good deal with one another, but nobody minds it, not even themselves, nor cares what becomes of them. If one human sect perishes, it is always easy to make another, or half a dozen. They have the life of worms, and propagate by corruption. Their life is so like death that, except by the putridity which they exhale in both stages, it is impossible to tell which is which, and when they are buried, nobody can find their graves: They have simply disappeared.

    But there were false prophets also among the people, just as among you there will be lying teachers who will bring in destructive sects. They even disown the Lord who bought them, thus bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their wanton conduct, and because of them the way of truth will be maligned. And out of greed they will with deceitful words use you for their gain. Their condemnation, passed of old, is not made void, and their destruction does not slumber. – 2 Peter 2:1-3

    Truth is ONE, and Scripture clearly states that there can be only ONE true Church. To whom do those words of condemnation and destruction in 2 Peter 2:1-3 apply? Heretics and bigots have been trying to destroy the Catholic Church for almost 2000 years To what, or to whom, would you ascribe two millennia of longevity and endurance of the Catholic Church ?

    Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so men persecuted the prophets who were before you. – Matthew 5:11-12

    Woe to you, when all men speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets. – Luke 6:26

    Most of Protestantism does not speak well of Catholics or of the Catholic Church, so I would venture to say that the above verses speak of the Catholic Church, wouldn’t you?

    Am I proud of the fact that numerous people abandoned the Catholic Church? Would you cry if traitors quit your camp? All who quit the Catholic Church do so of their own free will. Besides, St Augustine of Hippo has some fitting remarks for those who quit:

    This Church is Holy, the One Church, the True Church, the Catholic Church, fighting as she does against all heresies. She can fight, but she cannot be beaten. All heresies are expelled from her, like the useless loppings pruned from a vine. She remains fixed in her root, in her vine, in her love. The gates of hell shall not conquer her. – Saint Augustine of Hippo, Sermon to Catechumens, on the Creed, 6,14, 395 A.D.

    Thus when people quit the Church, such a development actually serves to purify Her. The Church must undergo numerous trials in order to purify Herself. And then shall they stand to be counted in the day of the Lord as is clearly said in Matthew 13:30

    …And at harvest time I will say to the reapers: gather up the weeds first and bind them in bundles to burn; but gather the wheat into My barn. .

    Who is the wheat here, and who are the weeds?

    If I were a non-Catholic, and were looking for the true Church in the world today, I would look for the one Church which which the world hates. My reason for doing this would be, that if Christ is in any one of the churches in the world today, He must still be hated as He was when He was on earth in the flesh. If you would find Christ today, then find the Church that does not get along with the world. Look for the Church which is hated by the world, as Christ was hated by the world. Look for the Church which is accused of being behind the times, as Our Lord was accused of being ignorant and of never having learned. Look for the Church which men sneer at as socially inferior, as they sneered at Our Lord because He came from Nazareth. Look for the Church which is accused of having a devil, as Our Lord was accused of being possessed by Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils. Look for the Church which, in seasons of bigotry, men say must be destroyed in the name of GOD as men crucified Christ and thought they had done a service to GOD. Look for the Church which the world rejects because it claims it is infallible, as Pilate rejected Christ because He called Himself The Truth. Look for the Church which is rejected by the world as Our Lord was rejected by men. Look for the Church which amid the confusion of conflicting opinions, its members love as they love Christ, and respect its Voice as the very voice of its Founder, and the suspicion will grow, that if the Church is unpopular with the spirit of the world, then it is unworldly, and if it is unworldly, it is other-worldly. Since it is other-worldly it is infinitely loved and infinitely hated as was Christ Himself. But only that which is Divine can be infinitely hated and infinitely loved. Therefore the Catholic Church is Divine.

  21. To what, or to whom, would you ascribe two millennia of longevity and endurance of the Catholic Church ?

    The cult of Mary aka Roman Catholicism still exists because Satan is not to be bound until the return of Christ.

    I’m done here. Karl is brainwashed and we can only pray God removes the scales from his eyes and grants repentance, so he might come to his senses and escape the snare of the devil. Karl is currently an unknowing captive of the enemy and doing his will for an apostate church.

    A NEW POPE

  22. Eden Hadassah said

    At the strong root of the catholic church is WORLDINESS! You spent more time talking about the church than about Christ.
    The catholic church has always been at the forefront of suppression and dominance. Sounds like the world to me. The catholic church has been corrupt throughout it’s claim of supremacy over kings and commoners alike…sounds like the world to me. The catholic church has been involved in puppetry with the governments she gives herself to, so that governments can slip in under the guise of “goodness” to strip peoples of their dignity and their culture, then to plunge the spiritual knife in and finish the task, they take the people’s money…what little is left after an invading government comes to rape the land and put people into debt. Sounds like the world to me…the catholic church hides corrupt priests and sends them to hurt more unsuspecting people…sounds like the world to me.
    Oh lets not forget that the catholic church gives to the poor, the hungry, the sick and the dying…isn’t that what the world does also?
    The catholic church has taken the lead in ecumenicalism to join all faiths together…sounds like the world to me.
    The catholic church has gold guilded halls and cathedrals galore, the finest linens and libraries, litergies and lavishness…sounds just like the world to me.
    The catholic church leads by example, and it has taught the world well. So excuse me if I don’t join you on your quest white wash her image, to do so is too worldly for me.

  23. johnkaniecki said

    Independent Conservative,

    Hi hope you are well. You admonished me into not bringing up the past. Perhaps in many cases this would be the right method. But look what Karl does. He throws two millennia of the Catholic Church into your face as you not in #21.

    It would be a worthwhile endeavour to explain the history to this man. It is not mudslinging but bringing up true events. These events either attest to the Godliness or the lack of Godliness in that organization. It is not wrong to examine the past it is only helpful.

    On a similar note I met a Jehova’s Witness. He seems like a reasonable man and we’ve had a few phone calls back and forth. I brought up the translation of the JW’s Bible to him. “Oh that was done by a team of twelve Greek experts,” was his reply. The truth of the matter is the translation of that Bible was done by a man who didn’t even know how to read the Greek language.

    Now Independent Conservative I ask you most sincerely is exploring that lie a worthwhile task. I’ve seen on the Mormon thread that people have brought up Joseph Smith’s shady past.

    Follow this logic. God is perfect. According to the Catholic church the Pope is the Vicar of Christ. Whatever the Pope says he does as a representative of God. Therefore the Pope is infallable and can do no wrong. Well what about the inquisition then and many other things. Aren’t these all signs that God is not really the one behind the Catholic Church. After all if He was and we follow the logic the Popes wouldn’t be making these mistakes.

    Karl isn’t the only Catholic out there. There are many people who have only bits and pieces of logic. I recall one day when I criticized the Catholic Church to a friend Ed. Ed told me, “I’m glad you said that I learned all about how the babies were found in the walls of the monastaries.” He was referring to how babies were murdered and then hidden to protect the church’s image.

    Many people only see Christianity as these swindlers on cable t.v. or what they learned in history.

    Love,

    John

  24. John you said:

    Now Independent Conservative I ask you most sincerely is exploring that lie a worthwhile task. I’ve seen on the Mormon thread that people have brought up Joseph Smith’s shady past.

    See where I said:

    Root your debate on someone’s accepted doctrine compared with scripture, not dead people, unless those dead people are revered by the group today as people they personally follow.

    This is why I mention Joseph Smith Junior made a cult to satisfy his sins along with the sinful desires of his cronies and they burn in hell. Because you can’t be a Mormon without having a view that Joseph Smith Junior was a “prophet” and the greatest man to walk earth since Christ. While Brigham Young is regarding by them as a “prophet”, they don’t hold him in the same esteem as Joseph Smith Junior.

    While Catholics follow the Pope, plenty of Catholics continue in the errors about Mary while being opposed to the Pope on various things. Most Catholics can’t even name who the Pope was during the Inquisition, never mind having real reverence for that particular Pope as Mormons do for Joseph Smith Junior.

    I don’t see Karl as Rick. But I can assure you that you folks will spend lots of time talking history with Karl and at the end of it he’ll have no better concept of what is wrong in the false doctrine he embraces today. He’s babbling about history because he’s running from the truth in the bad doctrine, that would force him to rethink his entire view of who God is. He’s tossed up one big pile of smoke, to avoid the elephant in the room, bad Catholic doctrine that fails the test when placed against scripture. Doctrine that he believes in. Doctrine that if Jesus came now would place his soul in a bad spot and he’d learn purgatory does not exists.

    It sounds as if your friend Ed already knew about those babies in the walls.

    Keep this in mind John, someone can walk away from association with the Roman Catholic crime and swindling syndicate organization and still in their heart be a believer of the false doctrine Roman Catholics teach. They can leave and still be seeking Mary as their intercessor. (There are people into that false doctrine that don’t take orders from the Vatican.) However, if someone remains in the organization, but has come to know the truth of who God is and who Mary is not, in time they will have to leave and even while there if the Lord returns they are saved by their faith.

  25. Karl said

    It is indeed pretty obvious that you despise and reject the catholic church. You refuse to listen to her, scorn and detest her, and seek by all the means in your power to calumniate her. You treat her as if she were your bitterest enemy, as the very quintessence of evil, and you had nothing to expect from her but the certain destruction of both soul and body in hell.

    Be what she may, you risk nothing in listening to her, or even in believing what she
    says because there is a reasonable presumption in her favor. The Catholic Church has never deceived you. It is, in fact, the philosophers, politicians, economists, poets, self-ordained pastors, the world, your own senses, instincts, passions, and pride that deceived you. The law of evidence is to believe every witness when there is no reason for disbelieving him.

    But the case may stand less favorable for you yet. For if you remain outside the catholic Church, what then will be your condition? Undoubtedly, the majority of you have no fear of judgment or hell. You look upon what the Church says of the last judgment, and the eternal punishment of the wicked, as an idle tale, or a bugbear to frighten the weak and timid. Still you must own that the Church possibly tells the truth, and that in spite of all the mockeries of the licentious and the profane, judgment and hell may turn out to be awful verities. You have not been able to discover any thing to the contrary. You cannot and have never been able to adduce a single fact against the Church.

    You can bring against her nothing but your own private judgment. But if what she teaches turns out to be true, where are you ? You are then the enemies of God. You have lost not only the life that now is, but that which is to come. You have lost the beatific vision and you will never see God. You will be doomed to suffer the tortures of hell for your sins, tortures which in the case of each single soul, will far outweigh all the actual or possible sufferings in the time of the whole human race from the beginning to the consummation of the world.

    On any grounds you choose to put it, you must admit that you have as good authority for believing the Catholic Church to be the Church of God as you have for believing that she is not. And if she is, there is no escape for you who reject her.

    Fellow men, these are great and solemn considerations. You have no good out of the Church, that is certain. She deceives you in nothing that she is the Church of God, and may raise you to God, and secure your eternal life. If she is, there is a last judgment, an everlast­ing hell. And you, if you do not return to her, and submit yourselves to her, will fall under the eternal wrath and condem­nation of God. What, in common prudence, then, is your duty?

    If she is the true Church, consider the danger to which you are exposed, the loss you must incur, and, above all, the scandal you give. Consider that you, then, neither enter into the kingdom of heaven yourselves, nor suffer those to enter that would. Are you not bound, in common prudence, to sit down patiently and investigate the claims of the Church? Are you not mad, if you do not ?

  26. Eden Hadassah said

    All will be disclosed my friend, as it is slowly coming to light now about the Catholic church, and you will be faced with some hard decisions. When the “vaults” of the Vatican are opened and documents are revealed about her “true beauty”, you are going to come face to face with the reality of your own mental constructs.
    You are enraptured by her, but will you test the flames of hell with her?
    She is not my enemy, but where she is going, I do not want to follow.
    I will follow the Lamb.

  27. Karl said

    How can you be following the lamb yet you refuse to obey His commands? You delude yourself.

  28. Eden Hadassah said

    I have obeyed his commands kind sir. There is no delusion for me, for it is clear from where I stand, who actually died upon the cross at calvary! Mary certainly didn’t do it, and neither did the church. Only Jesus made it possible for me to have eternal life. I bet you are even under the impression that you will be a little more “fire proof” for defending the church!
    Talk about delusions. 😉

  29. Charles said

    Karl:

    Reference your comment: “How can you be following the lamb yet you refuse to obey His commands? You delude yourself.”

    Exactly what has been said that would lead you to believe the command of the [L]amb has not been followed? For the life of me I cannot remember ever reading that the Catholic Church is the eternal doctrine. “Speaking evil of dignities that they do not understand” comes to mind when I see someone claiming exclusivity regarding church or doctrinal matters.

    I have followed the Catholic Church from very early in my life and on another thread I have been falsely labeled as being “Catholic.” One of the most dearest of two maternal influences in my life were laid to rest with the traditional burial mass, however, I cannot speak to their eternal life or whether they will stand face to face with my Lord. It is not my place to do so, just as it is not your place to say what you have said. Is your practice the way of “Catholics?” Or, is it that a moment of weakness, you have laid a charge against one without fully realizing what you have done.

    I can over-look many things, however, using either sins of comission or omission sends up a red flag. Be careful in your zeal.

    Charles

  30. Karl said

    I beg to defer.

    Christ has solemnly declared that only those will be saved who have done God’s will on earth as explained, not by private interpretation of the Bible, but by the infallible teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. For Christs says,

    Not everyone who saith to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of Heaven; but he that doth the will of My Father Who is in Heaven, he shall enter the kingdom of Heaven. (Matt. 7:21)
    The will of the heavenly Father is that all men hear and believe His Son, Jesus Christ,

    This is My beloved Son. Hear Him. (Luke 9:35)

    Now Jesus Christ said to His Apostles and to all their lawful successors:

    He that heareth you heareth Me, and he that despiseth you despiseth Me, and he that despiseth Me despiseth Him, the heavenly Father, that sent Me.

    Again, Jesus Christ says:

    Whoever will not hear the Church, look upon him as a heathen and a publican.

    Hence all those who do not listen to Jesus Christ speaking to them through St Peter and the Apostles in their lawful successors, despise God the Father. They do not do His will, and therefore Heaven will never be theirs.

    If you really understand scripture as you and all protestants claim, then you would have long understood that there can only be one church in which all who wish to be saved must belong. Therefore one is compelled to conclude that either you do not understand scripture, or the bible, the protestant bible, is corrupt.

  31. Eden Hadassah said

    Karl you don’t have to beg!
    Just remember that pride comes before a fall. And if you believe that private interpretation is wrong, then you are in the wrong church, because that is all the catholic church does…hence the brainwashing that you have sustained.

    If you put a frog in a pot of cool water on the stove, and slowly turn the temp. up, you can cook him alive and he wouldn’t know the difference…
    don’t be a frog Karl, come out of that pot before it starts to boil and burn you alive.

  32. Karl said

    I do not post on this forum simply out of pride, but to share the Truth; immutable Truth which has been known for centuries and will continue to stand for all eternity.

    However, if propagating the Truth is pride, then, yes, am indeed proud to be catholic and would rather die defending Truth rather than belong to one of the cursed and infernal protestant sects.

    And talking about frogs, judgment day shall reveal who the true frogs are.

  33. Eden Hadassah said

    Well that’s debatable seeing that there are three frogs in the book of Revelation.
    You mean sheep and goats don’t you?
    I think you have made your point quite clear about being prideful, thank you for admitting it. It’s a start.

  34. Charles D. said

    Karl please show me in the Bible, where it says:

    “but by the infallible teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.”

    You know, something that I can work with here. I know the Catholic version of the Bible contains things that were left out after the Council of Trent in 1529, show me in there even; if you can.

    Charles

  35. Eden Hadassah said

    When a Chief Rabbi becomes Pope what will you do then? Think about it. I wonder what your threshhold will be then.
    And don’t think it can’t happen.

  36. Karl said

    Charles,

    I respond to you by asking you to show me where it says in the bible that we must ONLY believe that which is written in the bible.

    1. Did Jesus Christ found the Bible or the Church?
    Does the Bible say it was the Bible? No, it says He founded His Church – Matthew 16:18.

    2. What is the pillar and foundation of the truth? Does the Bible say it is the Bible?
    No, it says it is the Church – 1 Timothy 3:15. This verse also tells us that the Church was already in existence before 1 Timothy was written.

    3. Who or what is the final authority? Does the Bible say it is the Bible?
    No, it says it is the Church – Matthew 18:15-18.

    4. Who is the teacher of all the wisdom of GOD?
    Does the Bible say it is the Bible? No, it says it is the Church – Ephesians 3:10.

    5. Who is to be saved? Does the Bible say that all who believe in Sola Scriptura, (the ‘Bible only’), will be saved? No, it says those who are attached to His Church will be saved.
    “And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved”Acts 2:47 , Note the singular, “the church”.

    6. What are we commanded to edify? Does the Bible say that we are to edify the Bible?
    No, it says we are to edify the Church – 1 Corinthians 14:12.

    7. Who or what rules the Church of GOD? Does the Bible say it is the Bible?
    No, the Bible says it is the Bishops that the Holy Spirit has appointed that rule the Church of GOD – Acts 20:28.

    8. What is it that Jesus purchased with His own blood? Does the Bible say it is the Bible?
    No, the Bible says that Jesus purchased the Church of GOD with His own blood – Acts 20:28, .

    9. For what did Christ give Himself up? Does the Bible say it was the Bible?
    No, the Bible says that Christ gave Himself up for the Church – Ephesians 5:25.

    10. What is it that Jesus nourishes and cherishes? Does the Bible say it is the Bible?
    No, the Bible says that Jesus nourishes and cherishes His Church – Ephesians 5:29.

    It is admitted by all, by Protestants and Catholics alike, that Christ has established a Church. Protestants acknowledge the that He has established but one Church. For, whenever Christ speaks of His Church, it is always in the singular. Bible readers, remember that. My Protestant friends, pay attention. Christ says: “Hear the Church”, and not hear the churches or read the bible. He says “I have built My Church upon a rock”, He does not say I have built My church or churches upon the bible. Whenever He speaks, whether in figures or parables of His Church, He always conveys to the mind a oneness, a union, a unity.

    Why on earth is it terribly difficult for protestants to grasp such simple but glaring Truths?

    Christ speaks of His Church as a sheepfold, in which there is but one shepherd, the head of all, and the sheep are made to follow the voice of this one shepherd…

    He speaks of His Church as of a kingdom, in which there is but one king to rule all. He speaks of His Church as a family in which there is but one Father at the head. He speaks of His Church as a tree, and all the branches of that tree are connected with the trunk, and the trunk with the roots. And Christ is the root, and the trunk is Peter and the Popes, and the large branches are the bishops, and the smaller branches the priests, and the fruit upon that tree are the faithful throughout the world; and the branch, says He, that is cut off from that tree shall wither away, produce no fruit, and is only fit to be cast into the fire, that is, damnation.

    Again I ask why is it difficult for protestants to grasp such fundamental and important a Truths?

    This is plain speaking, dear friends, it is pointless to conceal the truth. I want to speak the truth to you, as the Apostles preached it in their time, no salvation out of the Church of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

    Now, which is that Church? There are now 34000+ Protestant churches in existence, and almost every year one or two more are added. And besides this number there is the Catholic Church. Now, which of all these varied churches is the one Church of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ? All claim to be the Church of Jesus. But, my fellow men, it is evident no church can be the Church of Jesus except the one that was established by Jesus. And when did Jesus establish His Church? When? When He was here upon earth. That is an historical fact admitted by all. He lived on earth thirty-three years. That was about twenty centuries ago. That is the time Christ established His Church on earth. Any Church, then, that has not existed that long, cannot be the Church of Jesus Christ, but is the invention of some man; not of God, Not of Christ, but of man. Now, which is the Church that has existed thus long? History says that it is the Catholic Church. She, and she only among all Christian denominations on the face of the earth(if at all the sects are Christian), has existed so long. All history, bears testimony to this. And not only Catholic history, but Pagan history, Jewish history and Protestant history, as well. The history, then, of all nations, of all people, bears testimony that the Catholic Church is the oldest, the first, and therefore the one established by our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

    Not only all history, but all the monuments of antiquity bear testimony to this, and all the nations of the earth proclaim it. Ask protestants which was the first Christian Church?. Was it the Presbyterian, the Episcopalian, the Church of England, the Methodist, the Universalist or the Unitarian? And they will answer it was the Catholic Church. Now, if all admit that the Catholic Church is the first and the oldest, the Church established by Christ, why then are you not a Catholic?

    Protestants claim that the Catholic Church became corrupted, fell into error, and that, therefore, it was necessary to establish a new church. A new church, a new religion. And to this we answer: that if the Catholic Church had been once the true church, then she is still true ,and shall be the true Church of God to the end of time. Otherwise Jesus Christ has deceived us. Hear me, what I say! I say that if the Catholic Church now, in the 21st century, is not the true Church of God as she was 2000 years ago, then I say, Jesus, has deceived us, and he is an imposter! And if this is not the truth, may I drop dead, for in matters concerning our eternal fate I hate to be a in the same league as Satan, the father of and propagator of lies, right from the beginning.

    If it is admitted by all that the Catholic Church was once the true Church of God, then she is still the true Church, and shall be the true Church of God until the end of time, because Christ promised that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church. He says that He has built it upon a rock, and that the gates of hell shall never prevail against it.
    Now, my dear friends, if the Catholic Church has fallen into error, then the gates of hell have prevailed against her; and if the gates of hell have prevailed against her, then Christ has not kept His promise, which means He has deceived us, and if He has deceived us, then He is a liar! If He be a liar, then He is not God, and if He be not God, then all of Christianity is one massive fraud and an imposition. Again, in St. Matthew, 28, XIX and XX, our Divine Saviour says to His Apostles:

    Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe whatsoever I have commanded you. Lo, I, Jesus, the Son of the Living God, I, the Infinite Wisdom, the Eternal Truth, am with you all days, even until the end of the world. Note, Christ did not say teach them to read the bible. The bible did was not to exist until 1600 years later. Besides how many people were even literate then.

    Christ, solemnly swears that He shall be with His Church all days to the end of time, to the consummation of the world. But Christ cannot remain with the Church that teaches error, or falsehood, or corruption. If, therefore, the Catholic Church has fallen into error and corruption, as our Protestant friends claim, then Christ must have abandoned her. If so, He has broken His oath. If He has broken His oath He is a perjurer, and there is no Christianity at all.
    Again, our Divine Saviour has promised in St. John, 14 has promised that He would send to His Church the Spirit of Truth, to abide with her forever. If, then, the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Truth, teaches the Church all truth, and teaches her all truth forever, then there never has been, and never can be, one single error in the Church of God, for where there is all truth there is no error whatsoever. Christ has solemnly promised that He will send to the Church the Spirit of Truth, who shall teach all truth forever; therefore, there has never been a single error in the Church of God, or Christ has failed in His promises if there has.

    Again, Christ commands us to hear and believe the teachings of the Church in all things, at all times and in all places. He does not say hear the Church for a thousand years or for fifteen hundred years, but hear the Church, without any limitation, without any reservation, or any restriction of time whatever. That is, at all times; in all things until the end of time, and he that does not hear the Church let him be unto thee, says Christ, as a heathen and as a publican.
    Therefore, Christ says that those who refuse to hear the Church must be looked upon as heathens; and what is a heathen? One that does not worship the true God; and a publican is a public sinner. This is strong language. Could Christ command me to believe the Church if the Church could have led me astray, could lead me into error? If the teaching of the Church be corrupt, could He, the God of truth, command me without any restriction or limitation to hear and believe the teachings of the Church which He has established?
    Again: Our Divine Saviour commands me to hear and believe the teaching of the Church in the same manner as if He Himself were to speak to us, when he commissioned the Apostles.

    He that heareth you, heareth Me, and he that despiseth you despiseth Me.

    So then, when we believe what the Church teaches we believe what God teaches. If we refuse what the Church teaches we refuse what God teaches. So that Christ has made the Church the organ by which He speaks to man, and tells us positively that we must believe the teaching of the Church as if He himself were to speak to us. Therefore, says St. Paul, in his Epistle to Timothy, the Church is the ground, and the pillar of the truth.” Take the ground or foundation of this edifice away, and it crumbles down. So with regard to these pillars upon which the roof rests, take them away and the roof will fall in. So St. Paul says, “the Church is the ground and the pillar of truth,”. Take away the authority of the Church of God and you induce all kinds of errors and blasphemous doctrines. Do we not see this happen since Luther’s rebellion?
    In the 16th century Protestantism did away with the authority of the Church and constituted every man his own judge of the Bible, and what was the consequence? Religion upon religion, church upon church, sprang into existence, and has never stopped springing up new churches to this day.

    Millions of people today worship in churches inspired by Luther’s revolt. While millions of Catholics worship in a Church founded by Jesus Christ, millions of Protestants do indeed worship outside the Church in heretical sects started by a man who tossed out those parts of the Bible he didn’t like, who burned canon laws he couldn’t hack, who rejected dogmas embraced by every saint, virgin, martyr, and theologian for the first fifteen hundred years of Christianity, and who believed that men’s good deeds have nothing to do with salvation.
    In his Assertio omnium articulorum of 1520, Luther explains:

    Do you have anything to growl at here, you miserable Pope? For you it is necessary to revoke this article [Leo’s excommunication Bull]. For I have incorrectly said that free will before grace exists in name only. I should have said candidly: free will is a fiction, a name without substance. Because no one indeed has the free power to think good or evil but all things happen by absolute necessity.

    Essentially, Luther was preaching ecclesiastical anarchy, which in Catholic Europe translated automatically into civil unrest. The result was a bloodbath called the Peasants’ Revolt, which left as many as one hundred thousand dead in the streets. Death and destruction ensued…death of souls, death of bodies, even death of science and the arts. The great humanist Erasmus remarked Where Lutheranism flourishes,the sciences perish.

  37. Karl said

    Gentlemen,

    What came first, the New Testament part of the Bible or the Church? Does the Bible say it was the Bible that came first? Certainly not. It does, however, tells us that the Church was already in existence for years before any New Testament books were even written. And how do we know this? Because it is the Church which is mentioned in these books:

    Matthew 16:18 and 18:17,
    Acts 5:11, for one and many more times in Acts,
    Romans 16:23, and many more verses,
    Corinthians 1:2, and many more verses,
    2Corinthians 1:1,
    Galatians 1:13,
    Ephesians 1:22, and many more verses,
    Philippians 3:6 and 4:15,
    Colossians 1:18, and many more verses,
    1Thessalonians 1:1. 1 Thessalonians is considered to be the first New Testament book written, in about 51 A.D.
    2Thessalonians 1:1,
    1Timothy 3:5, 3:15 and 5:16,
    Titus 3:15, per added note in the King James Version,
    Philemon 1:2,
    Hebrews 2:12 and 12:23,
    James 5:14,
    1Peter 5:13,
    3John 1:6 and 1:9-10,
    Revelation 2:1, plus six more in the same book.

    Since all of these books mention the word Church, the Church had to have been in existence already for years before they were written. If that is true, then how was the teaching accomplished without a New Testament of Jesus Christ? Simply by the same way that Jesus Christ taught, orally. Oral teaching is Tradition, and is Apostolic oral teaching handed down to the successors of the Apostles and to their successors and … The Bible is oral Tradition written down. There was no such thing as Sola Scriptura even then. There was not any New Testament scripture for the first twenty years of the existence of the Church.

    Now, what does the Bible say about itself?

    1. The Bible clearly says that it is inspired by GOD, 2Timothy 3:16. This can only refer to the Old Testament, since there was no New Testament at the time that St. Paul wrote 2Timothy. Scores of spurious ‘gospels’ were written by Gnostics and others and were later declared by the Church to be not inspired. The new testament canon was not finalized until hundreds of years later in the fourth century and by the Church.

    2. The Bible clearly says it is useful for teaching, 2Timothy 3:16. Useful means just that, and it does not mean all encompassing or Bible only.

    3. The Bible clearly says that everything is not within it, John 20:30, John 21:25.

    4. The Bible clearly says that there are many things to say to you but you cannot bear them now, John 16:12. That implies future teaching, and again that everything is not in the Bible.

    5. The Bible clearly says you are being fed with milk (as with a baby) because you cannot eat meat as yet, 1Corinthians 3:2, Hebrews 5:12-13. Again we see implied future teaching which comes over time. Bye bye Sola Scriptura.

    6. The Bible clearly says when the Spirit of Truth has come, He will teach you all the truth, and the THINGS THAT ARE TO COME He will declare to you, John 16:13. In this verse there can be no doubt that everything is not in the Bible, and that things that are to come will be revealed over time by the Spirit of Truth through His Church.

    Here is but one of many prime examples of the fulfillment of this verse, and it is the word trinity. “Bible-alone” believers, show me the word trinity in the Bible. It is not mentioned even once. Yet, most bible alone believers do believe in the Trinity and they use the word extensively. Isn’t that being hypocritical to say that you believe in Sola Scriptura and also in the Trinity?
    The Trinity was not formally defined until the year 381 by the Catholic first Council of Constantinople. That was well over 270 years after the last book of the Bible, Revelation, was written. Remember Ephesians 3:10, as listed above? It said it is the Church that is the teacher.
    John 16:13 all by itself is the death knell of the false man made doctrine of Sola Scriptura, which means ‘Bible only’, or “if I cannot find it in the Bible, then I choose not to believe it simply because it does not exist or it never happened”.

    7. The Bible clearly says that you cannot interpret the Bible on an individual basis, Acts 8:30-35, 2Peter 1:20-21. Why then do so many non-Catholics do it when Holy Scripture says they shouldn’t? Who obeys the teaching of Holy Scripture, and who does not?

    8. The Bible clearly says that we are not to use ‘eisegesis’ to interpret Holy Scripture.
    “I have applied all this to myself and Apol’los for your benefit, brethren, that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another.” 1Corinthians 4:6
    The meaning of ‘eisegesis’ is, an interpretation of Scripture that expresses one’s own ideas or bias, rather than the true meaning of the text. In other words, reading something into Scripture that simply is not there.

    9. The Bible does not say it is the Bible only. The man-made false doctrine of Sola Scriptura cannot be found anywhere within it.

    10. The Bible does not say to discard Apostolic Tradition. After all, the Bible itself is merely Tradition written down. Jesus taught orally. The Apostles taught orally for many years before the first book of the New Testament was even written.

    11. The Bible does not say that it is the final authority.

    12. The Bible does not say that Jesus Christ told anyone to write the Bible itself.

    13. The Bible did not give us the Canon of inspired books that are included within it. The Canon of Holy Scripture was decided by the Catholic Church in the fourth century.

  38. Charles said

    Karl!

    You went to so much trouble to make an idiot of yourself. First of all, I was taught that it was impolite to respond to a question, with another question. You’ve taken that to a whole new level.

    By this time, Job, would normally have told one of your ilk that what you are doing is replacing Christ with the church! At last count (then, I stopped at 15 times because you were bordering on the absurd). For instance, it is a well established fact (Catholics might say “case law”), that:

    “Bible readers, remember that. My Protestant friends, pay attention. Christ says: “Hear the Church”, and not hear the churches or read the bible. He says “I have built My Church upon a rock”, He does not say I have built My church or churches upon the bible.”

    “Church” in this instance is plural. Had you been able to complete the verse without drawing attention to your flippant ignorance, you might have understood that “and the gates of hell shall not prevail..” further makes the point. Please notice, Christ did not say that there would not be hell within the church; okay, here it would be just to easy to draw attention to settlement of suit by piety of the Catholic church almost exclusively, and if you use your figures of “34000+ Protestant churches in existence,” then, Catholic “exclusivity” is secured. Christ said: “would not prevail.”

    The totality of what you’ve done here is exposed your inability to correctly interpret what you have read. And that has resulted in my original question to you to remain outstanding. So, Karl, please show me in the Bible, where it says:

    “but by the infallible teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.”

    Unless you can answer that question; or, in the alternative, publicly state that you don’t have a clue, then, you need not respond. I don’t want you to turn all Mormon on me.

    Charles

  39. Charles said

    Meaning: settlement of mucho suits, as in “abuse”

  40. Karl said

    Charles,

    I was hoping that your intelligence rating is above average. Once again please read my last posts.

  41. Charles said

    Karl said: “Charles, I was hoping that your [intelligence rating] is above average. Once again please read my last posts.”

    Then, you are in the minority, because I sure wasn’t hoping that my intel rating was above average! 🙂 to say nothing of my intelligence quotient.

    By those mere words, you have reveal enough about yourself, at least, sufficient for this guy to know that the dialogue between us is concluded.

    Charles

  42. Smart move Charles.

    By those mere words, you have reveal enough about yourself, at least, sufficient for this guy to know that the dialogue between us is concluded.

    I’m sure Job has also seen this guys comments and how he’s spun out about a zillion LIES and he’s so lost it’s not worth tossing pearls his way.

  43. Charles D. said

    Thanks. I thought he really had something scriptually based to say. I hope he didn’t think I was going to read all of that gibberish to get a answer to my simple question.

    Charles

  44. Karl said

    I, too, am done with you guys. Whoever said protestants are obstinate in their errors was absolutely right. And it is also true that protestantism leads to the denial of all religion, to atheism, and ultimately to nihilism because Protestants in gen­eral, rather than return to the Church, will push their hostility to its last consequence, which is the denial of God. Do not be surprised, therefore, if one day, you fellows end up becoming atheists. But before I quit I would like to quote Orestes A. Brownson, erstwhile, Presbyterian, Universalist, Unitarian, Transcendentalist, and finally the greatest American Catholic intellectual of all time.


    Protestants are protestants, not by virtue of reason, but in spite of reason. Not because they reason, but solely because they do not, will not, and dare not reason. Their rejection of reason is their fundamental vice. Revelation does not abrogate or supersede reason but restores it and supplies its deficiencies. Christianity is a system of pure grace; a supernatural creation for the natural, designed to repair the damage nature has incurred by guilt, and to enable man to attain the end to which his Creator originally appointed him. Man is not for the Sacraments, but the Sacraments are for man. The first office of grace is to restore nature, or to heal its wounds. Having restored it to health, it elevates it and uses it. Here is the grand fact that Protestant theologians always overlook. They, in reality, always present nature and grace as two antagonistic powers, and suppose the presence of one must be the physical destruction of the other. Luther and Calvin, weary of the good works, and shrinking from the efforts to acquire the personal virtues enjoined by Catholicity, began their so-called reform by asserting the total depravity of human nature, and maintaining that original sin involved the loss of reason and free-will, reduc­ing man physically to the condition of irrational animals, and adding the penalty of guilt. Here, in the very outset, they denied natural reason, all natural religion, and all natural morality, and consequently asserted for man in the natural or­der, left to his natural powers and faculties, universal skepticism and moral indifference, for without reason there can be no belief, and without free-will no moral obligation, no moral difference of actions.


    You are Protestants to the core and, like all protestants, have absolutely no principles, no character, no consistency, no authority, no law, no usage, by which consent to be bound. When your errors are convicted from tradition, you appeal to the Bible; convicted from the Bible, you appeal to reason ; convicted from reason, you appeal to private sentiment; convicted from private sentiment, you appeal to skepticism, or fly back to reason, to Scripture, or tradition, and alternately from one to the other. You never scruple nor blushing to be found maintaining that contraries may both be true. Protestants, it is well known, are able to keep up the self-delusion that they are believers only by obstinately refusing to push their principles to their legitimate consequences, and by shutting their eyes to the objections which may be suggested or urged against them.


    Protestants today, do not merely deny Catholic dogmas, or Christian revelation itself, but really deny all religion and morality, natural and revealed. They do not read the bible in search for the truth, and are never willing to accept truth, unless it be what you wish it to be. You occasionally read catholic books and listen to our arguments, but never to ascertain catholic doctrines, or to learn what they say against your cursed errors. The thought, that catholics may possibly be right, seldom occurs to you. And when it does, it is instantly suppressed as an evil thought, as a temptation from the Devil. You take it for granted, that, against catholics, they are right, and cannot be wrong. And while Protestants, in season and out of season, by means fair and by means foul, by means open and by means secret and tortuous, seek to detach Catholics from the Church, they are quite indifferent as to which of the 34000+ Protestant sects they are led to embrace, or whether they are even led to embrace any one of them. They are well aware that the majority of those they gain from catholicism turn out rank apostates, infidels, and blasphemers, they nevertheless rejoice over them, and claim them as so many accessions to their ranks. Is not protestant sympathy generally enlisted in favor of the infidel revolutions all over the world, all of which have been stirred up and helped on by Protestants, in the name of liberty, democracy, but in reality for the purpose of overthrowing and annihilating the Catholic Church ?

    Protestants do not hate the Catholic Church because they love truth, or believe the Church to be false and destructive to the souls of men (their hatred of the Church has nothing to do with concern for truth or for salvation. A large portion of Protestants believe in no truth, in no salvation ; a larger portion still are of opinion that all men will be saved, and that truth is whatever seems to a man to be true. The remainder hold that the Church is substantially orthodox, and that salvation is attainable in her communion, as well as in their own). So what is it that compels protestants to hate the catholic church? Hatred must a cause, real or imaginary. Hatred is love reversed, and in­tense hatred of one thing is the reverse action of intense love of something else. One need only search for that which Protestants love and the Church condemns, which condemnation draws the full hatred of protestantism upon the Catholic Church. It is the Protestants’ love for the spirit of lawlessness, which leads every one to wish to have his own way. Objectively defined, it is commonly expressed as, Forbidden fruit is sweetest. Subjectively defined, it is a craving for the prohibited, because protestantism imagines that the sovereign good is in what is prohibited, and opposes the Church because she upholds the law. Protestantism hates the law because the law restrains it, hates duty because duty obliges it ; and since, as long as protestantism admits the existence of God, it must admit duty, it denies God ; and since, as long as it admits the existence of anything, it must admit the existence of God, it denies everything, and lapses into nihilism. This is Protestantism in a nutshell.

    Protestantism resists what it finds offensive to human pride, to pure, unmitigated egotism, and what it asserts is always asserted as the means of securing license to its independent action. In the 16th century, this pride found itself galled by submission to the Church, for the Church could not tolerate its wild speculations and its theological errors. It then denied the authority of the Church. And in order to make a show of justifying its denial, it asserted the supremacy of the Scriptures, interpreted by private reason, or by the private Spirit. Soon it found that the asser­tion of the supremacy of the Scriptures, limited its sovereignty, and that it was as galling to its sense of independence to submit to a dead book as to a living Church. Then it denied the Scriptures, and, to justify its denial, asserted the supremacy of reason. But reason, galled it, reminded it of its dependence, and would not suffer it to live as it listed. Then it cried out, Down with reason, and up with sentiment! In order to resist effectually the Pope, it at one time, as in England, proclaims the divine right of kings. Then, in order to get rid of the divine right of kings, it proclaims the divine right of the people, or, to speak more accurately, of the mob. Finally, in order to get rid of the authority of the mob, it proclaims the divine right of each and every individual, and declares that each and every individual is God, thus resolving God into men, and all men into one man, which implies the right of every man to take the entire universe to himself, and possess it as his own property.

    The source of this impatience of restraint, and desire to have one’s own way, is the pride natural to the human heart, the root of every vice and of every sin. ” Your eyes shall he opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil,” said the serpent to Eve. And she reached forth her hand, plucked the forbidden fruit, ate, and sin and death thus came into the world. Pride is, on the one hand, a denial of our dependence, and, on the other, the assertion of our own sufficiency. Here you may see the origin and the essential characteristic of Protestantism, which is as old as the first motion of pride or of resistance to the will of God, witnessed, for the very first, in Lucifer when he screeched Non Serviam – I refuse to serve. Therefore we see that Lucifer was the first protestant.

    As parting advice to all protestants, meditate on the last four things namely, death, judgment, heaven, and hell.

  45. Karl said

    I, too, am done with you guys. Whoever said protestants are obstinate in their errors was absolutely right. And it is also true that protestantism leads to the denial of all religion, to atheism, and ultimately to nihilism because Protestants in gen­eral, rather than return to the Church, will push their hostility to its last consequence, which is the denial of God. Do not be surprised, therefore, if one day, you fellows end up becoming atheists. But before I quit I would like to quote Orestes A. Brownson, erstwhile, Presbyterian, Universalist, Unitarian, Transcendentalist, and finally the greatest American Catholic intellectual of all time.


    Protestants are protestants, not by virtue of reason, but in spite of reason. Not because they reason, but solely because they do not, will not, and dare not reason. Their rejection of reason is their fundamental vice. Revelation does not abrogate or supersede reason but restores it and supplies its deficiencies. Christianity is a system of pure grace; a supernatural creation for the natural, designed to repair the damage nature has incurred by guilt, and to enable man to attain the end to which his Creator originally appointed him. Man is not for the Sacraments, but the Sacraments are for man. The first office of grace is to restore nature, or to heal its wounds. Having restored it to health, it elevates it and uses it. Here is the grand fact that Protestant theologians always overlook. They, in reality, always present nature and grace as two antagonistic powers, and suppose the presence of one must be the physical destruction of the other. Luther and Calvin, weary of the good works, and shrinking from the efforts to acquire the personal virtues enjoined by Catholicity, began their so-called reform by asserting the total depravity of human nature, and maintaining that original sin involved the loss of reason and free-will, reduc­ing man physically to the condition of irrational animals, and adding the penalty of guilt. Here, in the very outset, they denied natural reason, all natural religion, and all natural morality, and consequently asserted for man in the natural or­der, left to his natural powers and faculties, universal skepticism and moral indifference, for without reason there can be no belief, and without free-will no moral obligation, no moral difference of actions.


    You are Protestants to the core and, like all protestants, have absolutely no principles, no character, no consistency, no authority, no law, no usage, by which consent to be bound. When your errors are convicted from tradition, you appeal to the Bible; convicted from the Bible, you appeal to reason ; convicted from reason, you appeal to private sentiment; convicted from private sentiment, you appeal to skepticism, or fly back to reason, to Scripture, or tradition, and alternately from one to the other. You never scruple nor blushing to be found maintaining that contraries may both be true. Protestants, it is well known, are able to keep up the self-delusion that they are believers only by obstinately refusing to push their principles to their legitimate consequences, and by shutting their eyes to the objections which may be suggested or urged against them.


    Protestants today, do not merely deny Catholic dogmas, or Christian revelation itself, but really deny all religion and morality, natural and revealed. They do not read the bible in search for the truth, and are never willing to accept truth, unless it be what you wish it to be. You occasionally read catholic books and listen to our arguments, but never to ascertain catholic doctrines, or to learn what they say against your cursed errors. The thought, that catholics may possibly be right, seldom occurs to you. And when it does, it is instantly suppressed as an evil thought, as a temptation from the Devil. You take it for granted, that, against catholics, they are right, and cannot be wrong. And while Protestants, in season and out of season, by means fair and by means foul, by means open and by means secret and tortuous, seek to detach Catholics from the Church, they are quite indifferent as to which of the 34000+ Protestant sects they are led to embrace, or whether they are even led to embrace any one of them. They are well aware that the majority of those they gain from catholicism turn out rank apostates, infidels, and blasphemers, they nevertheless rejoice over them, and claim them as so many accessions to their ranks. Is not protestant sympathy generally enlisted in favor of the infidel revolutions all over the world, all of which have been stirred up and helped on by Protestants, in the name of liberty, democracy, but in reality for the purpose of overthrowing and annihilating the Catholic Church ?

    Protestants do not hate the Catholic Church because they love truth, or believe the Church to be false and destructive to the souls of men (their hatred of the Church has nothing to do with concern for truth or for salvation. A large portion of Protestants believe in no truth, in no salvation ; a larger portion still are of opinion that all men will be saved, and that truth is whatever seems to a man to be true. The remainder hold that the Church is substantially orthodox, and that salvation is attainable in her communion, as well as in their own). So what is it that compels protestants to hate the catholic church? Hatred must a cause, real or imaginary. Hatred is love reversed, and in­tense hatred of one thing is the reverse action of intense love of something else. One need only search for that which Protestants love and the Church condemns, which condemnation draws the full hatred of protestantism upon the Catholic Church. It is the Protestants’ love for the spirit of lawlessness, which leads every one to wish to have his own way. Objectively defined, it is commonly expressed as, Forbidden fruit is sweetest. Subjectively defined, it is a craving for the prohibited, because protestantism imagines that the sovereign good is in what is prohibited, and opposes the Church because she upholds the law. Protestantism hates the law because the law restrains it, hates duty because duty obliges it ; and since, as long as protestantism admits the existence of God, it must admit duty, it denies God ; and since, as long as it admits the existence of anything, it must admit the existence of God, it denies everything, and lapses into nihilism. This is Protestantism in a nutshell.

    Protestantism resists what it finds offensive to human pride, to pure, unmitigated egotism, and what it asserts is always asserted as the means of securing license to its independent action. In the 16th century, this pride found itself galled by submission to the Church, for the Church could not tolerate its wild speculations and its theological errors. It then denied the authority of the Church. And in order to make a show of justifying its denial, it asserted the supremacy of the Scriptures, interpreted by private reason, or by the private Spirit. Soon it found that the asser­tion of the supremacy of the Scriptures, limited its sovereignty, and that it was as galling to its sense of independence to submit to a dead book as to a living Church. Then it denied the Scriptures, and, to justify its denial, asserted the supremacy of reason. But reason, galled it, reminded it of its dependence, and would not suffer it to live as it listed. Then it cried out, Down with reason, and up with sentiment! In order to resist effectually the Pope, it at one time, as in England, proclaims the divine right of kings. Then, in order to get rid of the divine right of kings, it proclaims the divine right of the people, or, to speak more accurately, of the mob. Finally, in order to get rid of the authority of the mob, it proclaims the divine right of each and every individual, and declares that each and every individual is God, thus resolving God into men, and all men into one man, which implies the right of every man to take the entire universe to himself, and possess it as his own property.

    The source of this impatience of restraint, and desire to have one’s own way, is the pride natural to the human heart, the root of every vice and of every sin. “Your eyes shall he opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil,” said the serpent to Eve. And she reached forth her hand, plucked the forbidden fruit, ate, and sin and death thus came into the world. Pride is, a denial of our dependence, and the assertion of our own sufficiency. Here one may see the origin and the essential characteristic of Protestantism, which is as old as the first motion of pride or of resistance to the will of God, witnessed, for the very first, in Lucifer when he screeched Non Serviam – I refuse to serve. Therefore Lucifer was the first protestant..

    Finally, as parting advice to Protestants, meditate on the last four things namely, death, judgment, heaven, and hell.

  46. Eden Hadassah said

    Karl,
    You are far too kind. Gee-whiz, goosh, and aah, I feel flattered by your judgemental attitude. I shall wear it as a badge of honor…
    You just condemned yourself with your own words. You know that right? I thought you were sooo much better than that, but I guess all that love talk was a bunch of catholic hooey, wasn’t it?
    The effect you were hoping for didn’t happen, did it? It doesn’t work with the Mormons either. You can’t merit eternal life by thinking you can come to this board and convince of anyone to “come to the true church.” What the heck was your sin that you would continue to punish yourself here? The only salvation is through Jesus Christ and him crucified. Not his mother, or the church.
    I will be praying for you. I would hate to see you end up like Mother Angelica half alive mumbling the rosery some day. Have you seen her lately? She isn’t looking so good. I remember when she was able to talk and was quite fiesty. She was really cool.

  47. Karl,

    Don’t get frustrated,

    This blog sadly is filled with some lost, hateful folks. The only one who can judge is God. Not these people.

    Job, no offense but I think you need some new friends, ones that invite all to know Christ, not ones who gang up on, condemn and then chase people from your blog (and your beliefs).

  48. johnkaniecki said

    Karl and Steffielynn,

    Greetings. First might I remind you that I have been nothing but nice to everyone on this blog.

    It quite amazes me that you would find common ground. I believe in sharing common ground when possible. Yet there is a truth out there. Not everyone could be right, now could they especially when they espouse conflicting ideas. If you would examine what you profess to believe you would fine miles between yourselves.

    I go to a peace rally every Friday. There are people in attendance of all different religions. As a pacifist I wouldn’t support any war except a spiritual one. That is how I understand scriptures like Mathew 5:44 where it tells us to Love our enemies. I can embrace muslims and aethiests in an effort towards promoting my goal of world peace through non violence. As I stand shoulder to shoulder with them we share our hopes and asperations for a better world.

    What I cannot do is compromise my Christian values. Not even one bit. I will civily discuss with Jamal my muslim friend what I believe is the truth about Jesus. That is that He is the Son of God. I would never for the purpose of unity fail to testify to that end.

    So Steffielynne for the sake of this discussion and for my enlightenment I’d like to ask a question I get from Karl’s blog.

    Let’s start with Karl’s comment that salvation can only be found with communion with the Catholic Church and not in protestant religions. Do you agree with this statement? I assume you don’t think of yourselves as Catholic and consider yourself in the Protestant camp. If you agree with Karl then he condemns your religion as false. If not then you are really doing Karl a diservice by pretending everything is okay.

    Please answer that question for starters.

    I never like the harshness of some blogs and a history of my entries would show that opinion quite clearly. Saying this, this is a forum to intelligently discuss things and I realize people get excited and caught up in their words.

    Love,

    John

  49. johnkaniecki said

    Steffielynne,

    Look at this quote.

    You are Protestants to the core and, like all protestants, have absolutely no principles, no character, no consistency, no authority, no law, no usage, by which consent to be bound. When your errors are convicted from tradition, you appeal to the Bible; convicted from the Bible, you appeal to reason ; convicted from reason, you appeal to private sentiment; convicted from private sentiment, you appeal to skepticism, or fly back to reason, to Scripture, or tradition, and alternately from one to the other. You never scruple nor blushing to be found maintaining that contraries may both be true. Protestants, it is well known, are able to keep up the self-delusion that they are believers only by obstinately refusing to push their principles to their legitimate consequences, and by shutting their eyes to the objections which may be suggested or urged against them.

    Does this jibe with

    This blog sadly is filled with some lost, hateful folks. The only one who can judge is God. Not these people.

    Steffielynne

    Quite honestly I have lost a lot of respect for you that I have had. If you don’t think that these comments by Karl are hurtful, hateful and arrogant you don’t know the meaning of those words.

    I think you’ve sold out just to score some points in some sort of contest of tit for tat. The only way to deal with people you feel are demeaning and insulting to you is to take the high road. Learn from Christ “though reviled He reviled not.” It is a mark of a Christian to take an insult and then to “turn the other cheek”.

    Lead by example young lady.

    Finally it says “Don’t cast your pearls before swine.” I certainly don’t consider you swine Steffielynne or I wouldn’t be writing this conclusion. Yet you have some serious thinking to do in my opinion.

    There is only one way to Christ. Catholicism, Mormonism and Christianity (At least as how I know it) are all in conflict in their directions on how to do that. You just can’t embrace all three they contradict.

    Love,

    John

    We will talk later.

  50. John said:

    If you would examine what you profess to believe you would fine miles between yourselves.

    Don’t give the fun away John. I was hoping they would team up. A Mormon who’s group teaches they are the one true church along with a Catholic who’s group teaches the same. Both groups totally apostate, thinking they are “God’s true church”.

    The apostates have to join at some point. For a moment I thought the joining for the Anti-Christ would take it’s next big step right here on this blog.

    I can embrace muslims and aethiests in an effort towards promoting my goal of world peace through non violence. As I stand shoulder to shoulder with them we share our hopes and asperations for a better world.

    John, wouldn’t the Muslim and fool atheist need Christ or their aspirations are all in vain? (And don’t get upset I call atheists fools, God calls them fools, Psalm 14:1.) Where does your Bible tell you that there will be some form of global peace before the return of Christ? My Bible says that this world won’t have Peace till the True Prince of Peace returns.

    I’m glad you use the rallies to speak about Christ though. Be sure to tell them at the next one that all their efforts are in vain if they don’t come to know the Prince of Peace.

  51. Charles D. said

    Good call, IC.

    John: How many times have I used Mormon in responding to Karl’s comments, I mean his ravings. Afterwards, look at the Mormon thread between Stehhlynn, Loveman4 and myself where I describe a favorite recruitment tact of Mormons? “you and me against those awful people” remember now?

    Tell you what; Karl will never know what hit him, except, that he was killed by kindness, sweetness, then, POW 😦

    Unfortunately, I’m ammuned to her fangs, as most of us are.

    Charles

  52. Charles D. said

    Hey Karl! Do you know Stephen K. Weber, the ex-Catholic?

    Charles

  53. johnkaniecki said

    Independent Conservative,

    Hi hope you are well.

    I recall one time a pornography place opened in our town. It wasn’t just selling movies it was far darker than that. Anyway the Catholics were there in force everynight picketing and watching who went in. The porno shop closed after a couple of months. I believe what they did was a God glorifying thing.

    Look at the issue of abortion. I know from the clicker on your website you are very concerned with this tragedy. Now hypothetically if a presidental candidate got up there and said, “I’m going to stop all abortion in America,” that would lean you to support him wouldn’t it. It of course wouldn’t be the only factor but it would help. Even if that man wasn’t a Christian.(Of course these people are only Christians in name and sometimes not even that.) The Bible does say “For he that is not against us is on our part.” Mark 9:40.

    The same thing with these peace vigils I attend. I know there will not be lasting peace until the thousand years. Yet just like ending abortion it is a goal that I am committed to have happen. Also I feel public protest like we do accomplishes several good things.
    1. It is an exercise of free speech.
    2. It is a hindrance to fascism.
    3. It makes people think.
    4. It soldifies my bond to other like minded people some dedicated Christians.
    5. It helps me feel better personally.
    6. I enjoy doing it.

    Eventually God will establish His kingdom. He’s not just going to wave his hand and presto a kingdom will appear. No He will act as He has always done. That is He will use what He has to accomplish His task. That is the people who are alive today are being prepared to that glorious time in the future.

    Love,

    John

  54. John, in my comment I said “SOME lost hateful folks”…, I think it is quite obvious (by their comments) who I am speaking of. I was not including you, so please do not take offense.

    I do not believe that only Mormons will go to heaven. I believe any rightous God loving, good hearted person will, whether they are Christian, Catholic, etc.

    Karl most likely disagrees with my faith, many do. But it is HOW you disagree, do you attack someone and belittle them?

    As Charles has stated “I’m ammuned to her fangs”.

    He is trying to make me seem evil and devious, which I am not. If you all could only know me, you would see that I am a pretty nice girl. I always have been. It is not because I am Mormon that I care about people, it is natural, as a lutheran I was just as nice and “sweet”. But as a Mormon I strive to walk the walk.

    So be what ever faith you choose to be, because, again, I believe MANY will be in Heaven, not just Mormons!

    I guess the point is that if you truly love God then people should follow your example John and love and teach of Christ’s love, people receive that much better then, “your going to hell because you are not like US”

  55. John,

    I recall one time a pornography place opened in our town. It wasn’t just selling movies it was far darker than that. Anyway the Catholics were there in force everynight picketing and watching who went in. The porno shop closed after a couple of months. I believe what they did was a God glorifying thing.

    We are to have no part of darkness, but where in your Bible does it tell you to protest outside a porno shop? Did Jesus go to the house of harlots and hold a protest? (Last time I checked my Bible He only went to clean out the temple when it was defiled.) I’m not saying I’m against someone protesting outside a porno shop, but I believe Catholics do a lot of grand standing in a lot of places, while they’re following apostate doctrine, that has them pointed straight to hell in all their “good works”.

    Now hypothetically if a presidental candidate got up there and said, “I’m going to stop all abortion in America,” that would lean you to support him wouldn’t it.

    Last time I checked, the lying Mormon named Mitt Romney, the Pulpit Pimp supporter named Mick Huckabee and the pal of White Supremacists named Ron Paul all talked about how they are against seeing babies killed in the womb, but I’m against all of them.

    So in reality, no. Just because someone says they are anti-abortion does not cause me to support them. I’m not so lost on a “good work” that I lose focus of the real mission to uphold Christ in truth.

    It of course wouldn’t be the only factor but it would help.

    It’s not helping me like any of the 3 I mentioned above. It only sickens me more when I think of them because they seek to play me like a foolish pawn.

    The Bible does say “For he that is not against us is on our part.” Mark 9:40

    John, why did you have to go there? Now I’ve got to cut into that with the full sword, because you came with a butter knife in trying to pull that verse, to endorse locking up with apostates.

    Now lets take a look together at a few more verses than the one you’ve mishandled, while including it in proper context.

    Mark 9:38-42 (King James Version)

    38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.

    39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.

    40 For he that is not against us is on our part.

    41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.

    42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.

    Now you see John, the person who Jesus was speaking of was casting out devils in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. That’s when someone is with you. Apostates are not only against you, they are the ones who seek to feast on little ones in the faith and would have them to stumble into their darkness. If it were possible, the Muslim who denies the Lord Jesus as the Son of God and promotes the rantings of Muhammad and the atheist who desires to lure people into their lies through empty philosophy would deceive the elect, Matthew 24:24. They certainly ARE NOT who Christ was speaking of.

    (1 verse out of context = Butter Knife, that is how people such as Karl operate. The words in full context = wielding The Sword.)

    Eventually God will establish His kingdom. He’s not just going to wave his hand and presto a kingdom will appear. No He will act as He has always done. That is He will use what He has to accomplish His task. That is the people who are alive today are being prepared to that glorious time in the future.

    Well my Bible says He’s going to come and take us to that Kingdom pretty fast and it could literally come at ANY MOMENT.

    1 Corinthians 15:51-58 (King James Version)

    51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

    52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

    53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

    54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

    55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?

    56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

    57 But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

    58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.

    But when you find where Paul and Peter locked arms with the pagans for a rally, please let me know.

    I’m not saying you’re in sin. I’m just saying, if we’re discussing here what is for Christ, some things simply don’t mesh with the example we have in scripture.

    Still in me saying all of that brother, I’m all for you going to those who don’t know the Lord Jesus and telling them about Him.

  56. Steffielynn

    You lie so much.

    I do not believe that only Mormons will go to heaven. I believe any rightous God loving, good hearted person will, whether they are Christian, Catholic, etc.

    So be what ever faith you choose to be, because, again, I believe MANY will be in Heaven, not just Mormons!

    Mormons including you and don’t believe in “heaven”. You believe in a bogus thing called a “Celestial Kingdom”. You believe in 3 heavens. And don’t say you don’t, remember I’ve read what you put up, so I know what you really endorse you apostate!

    Here’s the truth of why you need to turn from that garbage Joseph Smith Junior lied to you about: Subject: PLAGARISM: True origin of the “Celestial Kingdom”

    You’re right Charles, if not careful:

    killed by kindness, sweetness, then, POW 😦

    That link above shows what the Mormon spiritual POWs believe. Then they come around here looking for gullible souls to dupe and talk about “heaven” 🙄 .

  57. The Gospel of Mormonism: The Law Of Eternal Progression

    If you want to know what game Mormons are playing when they talk about people going to “heaven” it’s all in that link above.

    And you’ll realize really quick, their use of the term “heaven” is nothing more than another Mormon play on words. They believe in something that is TOTALLY of the OCCULT!

  58. Charles D. said

    steffielynn

    Might be helpful if you used “who” and “whom” appropriately. If you’re referring to me, I promise not to be offended; honestly. I do believe, however, that before you are in a position to assign ANYONE to either heaven or hell; you will first denounce that cult that you now say you believe in and come to know the saving grace of Christ and Him crucified.

    Furthermore, the “lutheran” experience you describe above, differ significantly, than the mostbase of experiences you have described in previous comments. Why is that?

    Charles

    You know, I’ve asked myself, why would Karl a ?Catholic” come to a thread about Mormons. etc., and why would you choose him to comfort and coo. Coincedent?

  59. Why do you think everything is a conspiracy Charles????

    When speaking about My “Lutheran experience” I have many different feelings about it. I was a member of the church for 10 years. There were great people there. There were also not so great people there. I disagree with the doctrine. BUT I do not think the Church itself is bad. In my comment above I was speaking of myself, not the church. I was pointing out that I was a nice person then as well. The difference is that YOU people would not take my sweetness as “evil” if I were Lutheran.

    IC again, a belief can not be called a lie. So you really need to get over the finger pointing game.

    When I speak of Heaven I am speaking of the Celestial Kingdom, the highest degree of Glory, and yes, there will be all kinds of people there, not just LDS.

    And Charles, I will answer any questions you have as long as you remain respectful, I am not here to get you to join my church. I am here as I have said before to defend my faith.

  60. Karl said

    That outside the Catholic there is no salvation is not my own personal opinion. Neither is it a new doctrine, for it has been affirmed many times by the 4th Lateran Council, the Councils of Nicea, Florence, Trent etc. Many Popes and early Church Fathers preached this Truth boldly, directly, and without fear of so-called political correctness prevalent today. Whether you believe what they said is another matter all together because the people who made these statements are Catholic, a fact that might not go down well with the implacable enemies of the Catholic Church. It is worthwhile, though, to ignore any and all repugnance and contemplate these awful Truths.

    Saint Augustine (died A.D. 430): No man can find salvation except in the Catholic Church. Outside the Catholic Church one can have everything except salvation. One can have honor, one can have the sacraments, one can sing alleluia, one can answer amen, one can have faith in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and preach it too, but never can one find salvation except in the Catholic Church. (Sermo ad Caesariensis Ecclesia plebem)

    Saint Augustine and the Council of Cirta (412 A.D.): He who is separated from the body of the Catholic Church, however laudable his conduct may otherwise seem, will never enjoy eternal life, and the anger of God remains on him by reason of the crime of which he is guilty in living separated from Christ. [Epist. 141 (CH 158)].

    Saint Gregory the Great: The holy universal Church teaches that God cannot be truly adored except within its fold; she affirms that all those who are separated from her will not be saved. [Moral. in Job. XIV,5 (CH 158)].

    Saint Jerome (died A.D. 420): As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is, with the Chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the Church is built. This is the ark of Noah, and he who is not found in it shall perish when the flood prevails. …And as for heretics, I have never spared them; on the contrary, I have seen to it in every possible way that the Church’s enemies are also my enemies. (Manual of Patrology and History of Theology)

    Saint John Chrysostom, Doctor, (died A.D. 407): We know that salvation belongs to the Church alone, and that no one can partake of Christ nor be saved outside the Catholic Church and the Catholic Faith. (De Capto Eutropia)

    Saint Fulgentius (died A.D. 533): Most firmly hold and never doubt that not only pagans, but also all Jews, all heretics, and all schismatics who finish this life outside of the Catholic Church, will go into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. (Enchriridion Patristicum)

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

    St. John Chrysostom (died A.D. 407): We know that salvation belongs to the Church alone, and that no one can partake of Christ nor be saved outside the Catholic Church and Catholic Faith. (De Capto Eutropio)

    There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church … and it is they who in His Church have laboured in doing good works whom the Lord says shall be received into the Kingdom of Heaven on the Day of Judgment. (Epistle 73:21)

    St Catherine of Alexandria (died A.D. 307): It is necessary for you to believe the Catholic Faith and to be baptized, as must every man in order to save his soul. (Saints to Know and Love)

    Lactantius (died A.D. 310) It is the Catholic Church alone which retains true worship. This is the fountain of truth, this is the abode of the Faith, this is the temple of God; into which if anyone shall not enter, or from which if anyone shall go out, he is a stranger to the hope of life and eternal salvation. (The Divine Institutes)

    Saint Ambrose (died A.D. 397): Where Peter is therefore, there is the Church. Where the Church is there is not death but life eternal. …Although many call themselves Christians, they usurp the name and do not have the reward. (The Fathers of the Church)

    Pope St. Clement I(A.D. 88-97): Heretical teachers pervert Scripture and try to get into Heaven with a false key, for they have formed their human assemblies later than the Catholic Church. From this previously-existing and most true Church, it is very clear that these later heresies, and others which have come into being since then, are counterfeit and novel inventions. (Epistle to the Corinthians)

    Saint Ignatius of Antioch: Do not deceive yourselves, he who adheres to the author of a schism will not possess the kingdom of God. [Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3 (CH 158)].

    Saint Cyprianus: Whosoever is separated from the Church is united to an adulteress. He has cut himself off from the promises of the Church, and he who leaves the Church of Christ cannot arrive at the rewards of Christ (…) He who observes not this unity observes not the law of God, holds not the faith of the Father and the Son, clings not to life and salvation. [De Cath. Eccl. Unitate, n 6 (CH 555)].

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

    Saint Bede the Venerable O.S.B., Doctor, (died A.D. 735): He who will not willingly and humbly enter the gate of the Church will certainly be damned and enter the gate of hell whether he wants to or not.” (Sermon 16) “Without this confession, without this faith, no one can enter the kingdom of God. (Sermon 16)

    Saint Peter Mavimenus (died A.D. 743): Whoever does not embrace the Catholic Christian religion will be damned, as was your false prophet Mohammed. (Roman Martyrology, February 20th) [Upon this profession of the faith, the infidel murdered him.]

    Pope Sylvester II, A.D. 999-1003: I profess that outside the Catholic Church, no one is saved. (Profession of Faith made as Archbishop of Rheims, June 991; Letters of Gerbert, NY: Columbia University Press.) [This is the man that introduced Arabic numerals (the ones we use) into the West.]

    Pope Saint Leo IX, A.D. 1049-1054): [regarding the eastern so-called “Orthodox” schismatics]: If you live not in the body which is Christ, you are none of His. Whose, then, are you? You have been cut off and will wither, and like the branch pruned from the vine, you will burn in the fire – an end which may God’s goodness keep far from you.

    Innocent III and the Fourth Ecumenical Council of the Lateran (1215 A.D.): There is only one universal Church of the faithful, outside of which no one can be saved. [Cap. I; De fide cath.; DS 802 (CH 159)].

    Saint Thomas Aquinas (died A.D. 1274): There is no enterning into salvation outside the Church, just as in the time of the deluge there was none outside the ark, which denotes the Church. (Summa Theologiae)

    Pope Eugene IV: Whoever wishes to be saved needs, above everything else, to hold the Catholic faith. Unless each one preserves this faith whole and inviolate, he will perish in eternity without a doubt. – Exultate Deo, DZ 695

    Pope Adrian II The first requirement of salvation is to keep to the standard of the true faith. Actio I,” DZ 171, n.1

    Pope Gregory XVI He who is separated from the body of the Catholic Church, however praiseworthy his conduct may otherwise seem, will not be saved. “Perlatum Ad Nos,” PTC:186; “Summo Jugiter,” PTC:158

    Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum: The Church…regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own…The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium…Whosoever is separated from the Church is united to an adultress. He has cut himself off from the promises of the Church, and he who leaves the Church of Christ cannot arrive at the rewards of Christ…He who observes not this unity observes not the law of God, holds not the faith of the Father and the Son, clings not to life and salvation.

    Pope Pius VIII Remember this firm dogma of our religion: that outside the true Catholic faith no one can be saved. – RECOLLECTIONS OF THE LAST FOUR POPES, Cardinal Nicholas Wiseman, London: 1858

    Pope Pius IX See to it that the faithful have fixed firmly in their minds this dogma of our most holy religion: the absolute necessity of the Catholic faith for attaining salvation. – Nostis et Nobiscum,” December 8, 1849

    Pope St. Pius X Where is the road which leads us to Jesus Christ? It is the Church. It is our duty to recall to everyone, great and small, the absolute necessity we are under to have recourse to this Church in order to work out our eternal salvation.” – “Supremi Apostolatus, PTC:654; “Jucunda Sane,” PTC:668

    Pope Pius XI If any man does not enter the Church, or if any man departs from it, he is far from the hope of life and salvation. – Mortalium Animos,” PTC:873

    Pope Pius XII No one can depart from the teaching of Catholic truth without loss of faith and salvation. – Pius XII: “Ad Apostolorum Principis,” PTC:1536

    Council of Trent Constantly hold and profess this true Catholic faith, without which no one can be saved. Tridentine Profession of Faith, DZ:1000

    Vatican I This true Catholic faith, outside which no one can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold, I do promise and swear that I will most constantly keep and confess whole and inviolate with the help of God until the last breath of my life, and that I will take great care that it be held, taught, and preached by my inferiors and by those who are placed under my charge. – Papal Oath

    St. Gaudentius of Brescia (died A.D. 410): We should mourn for those who are dying without the Faith … And well should the pagan weep and lament who, not knowing God, goes straight to punishment when he dies! On the Consolation of Death)

    It is certain that all men of Noah’s time perished, except those who merited being in the Ark, which was a figure of the Church. Likewise, they cannot in any way now be saved who are aliens from the Apostolic Faith and the Catholic Church. (De Lect. Evangel)

    Saint Peter Canisius (died A.D. 1597): Outside of this communion – as outside the ark on Noah – there is absolutely no salvation for mortals: not for Jews or pagans who never recieved the faith of the Church, nor for heretics who, having recieved it, corrupted it; neither for the excommunicated or those who for any other serious cause deserve to be put away and separated from the body of the Church like pernicious members…for the rule of Cyprian and Augustine is certain: he will not have God for his Father who would not have the Church for his mother. (Cathechismi Latini et Germanici)

    Saint Robert Bellarmine (died A.D. 1621): Outside the Church there is no salvation…therefore in the symbol [Apostles Creed] we join together the Church with the remission of sins: `I believe in the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of Saints, the forgiveness of sins’…For this reason the Church is compared with the ark of Noah, because just as during the deluge, everyone perished who was not in the ark, so now those perish who are not in the Church. (De Sacramento Baptismi)

    St. Francis of Assisi And all of us humbly entreat and beseech everyone, all nations and all men in all the earth who are, and who shall be, that we may all of us persevere in the true faith: for otherwise no one can be saved.

    St. Louis Marie de Montfort There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Anyone who resists this truth perishes.

    St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori We must believe that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true Church; hence, they who are out of our Church, or they who are separated from it, cannot be saved.

    Bishop Niceta of Remesiana (died A.D. 415): He is the Way along which we journey to our salvation; the Truth, because He rejects what is false; the Life, because He destroys death. …All who from the beginning of the world were, or are, or will be justified – whether Patriarchs, like Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, or Prophets, whether Apostles or martyrs, or any others, make up one Church, because they are made holy by one faith and way of life, stamped with one Spirit, made into one Body whose Head, as we are told, is Christ. The angels and virtues and powers in heaven are co-members in this one Church, for, as the Apostle teaches us, in Christ all things whether on the earth or in the heavens have been reconciled. You must believe, therefore, that in this one Church you are gathered into the Communion of Saints. You must know that this is the one Catholic Church established throughout the world, and with it you must remain in unshaken communion. There are, indeed, other so called `churches’ with which you can have no communion. …These ‘churches’ cease to be holy, because they were deceived by the doctrines of the devil to believe and behave differently from what Christ commanded and from the tradition of the Apostles. (The Fathers of the Church)

    Could these men have been saying untruths, especially given that these statements where made at the time the church was still growing? If so then how comes they are Saints? Therefore, he who hates the Truth must necessarily hate the men who say that outside the catholic faith there is no salvation.

    And why do I post these things? So that the Truth can be know by those who love Truth..

  61. Charles D. said

    Karl, okay, now I know – you are a cut N’ paste junkie. If you want people to actually read your stuff, then, for God’s sake remember “Brevity is the soul of wit;” make them SHORTER!!

    I’ve probably not read more than 6-7 sentences out of all of your comments. You might post them to sound smart, but, I have known what I read of those sentences very probably before you were born. Yes, I’m an aged old son-of-a-gun, but not a dumb one. Anyway, make them short.

    Steff: I don’t think there is a conspiracy in everything. The Mormons that I have met couldn’t launch a conspiracy anyway. Certainly I’m not paranoid. You know what “they” say: that all that it takes to disprove that one is paranoid is a true event.” My point to you was; in trying to sooth John into thinking you excluded him in your sinful remarks yesterday, you used the singular form of “who,” while the inclusivity of your comments spoke for itself and did indeed include John. Hence my comment about “who” and “whom.” How would you call it? Check it out. 🙂

    I know that you always include every and any that believe differently than you portend to believe. Notice you didn’t answer my question and neither did Karl (Marx). Hey! Have a good one and don’t you dare assign any of my blessed ones to hell today.

    Charles

  62. Steffielynn affirms my calling her an apostate!


    I was a member of the church for 10 years.

    I disagree with the doctrine.

    She tasted the truth and has rejected it.

    She says:

    I was pointing out that I was a nice person then as well.

    Which means we can’t use her as a measure for if Mormons are nice people. Because they do tend to get violent at times. And lets not even get into their history of slaughter.

    When I speak of Heaven I am speaking of the Celestial Kingdom, the highest degree of Glory, and yes, there will be all kinds of people there, not just LDS.

    Nobody can be at a place that does not exists.

    You’re not going to become a “god” and there is no 3 part Heaven. The “Celestial Kingdom” DOES NOT EXISTS!

    Now Steffielynn, you’ve placed yourself in a most interesting situation. Because you claim people outside of LDS will make it into your fictional and occult inspired “celestial kingdom”, where you feel you all will become “gods”. But the doctrinal teaching of your cult says the following:

    LDS Gospel Principle: EXALTATION


    If we prove faithful to the Lord, we will live in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom of heaven. We will become exalted, just like our Heavenly Father. Exaltation is the greatest gift that Heavenly Father can give his children (see D&C 14:7).

    Requirements for Exaltation

    The time to fulfill the requirements for exaltation is now (see Alma 34:32-34). President Joseph Fielding Smith said, “In order to obtain the exaltation we must accept the gospel and all its covenants; and take upon us the obligations which the Lord has offered; and walk in the light and understanding of the truth; and ‘live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God’ ” (Doctrines of Salvation, 2:43).

    To be exalted, we first must place our faith in Jesus Christ and then endure in that faith to the end of our lives. Our faith in him must be such that we repent of our sins and obey his commandments.

    He commands us all to receive certain ordinances:

    1. We must be baptized and confirmed a member of the Church of Jesus Christ.
    2. We must receive the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.
    3. We must receive the temple endowment.
    4. We must be married for time and eternity.

    There are other “commandments”, but lets look at those 4, because for your cult those are the big ones.

    1. Your cult says someone MUST be baptized and confirmed LDS. When your cult says “the Church of Jesus Christ”, they mean LDS. Someone MUST be confirmed by LDS in your fictional Mormon doctrine. If not, they are not by your cult’s teachings entitled to “exaltation”, they can’t reach the highest degree of your fictional “celestial kingdom”.

    On point 1 you seem to disagree with your cult. Do you agree or disagree with your cult on this?

    2. The laying on of hands has to be done by a LDS cult member who is susposedly of the “Melchizedek Priesthood”. Your cult teaches this MUST occur for someone to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

    On point 2 you seem to disagree with your cult. Do you agree or disagree with your cult on this?

    3. Temple endowment was created by your cult’s founder Joseph Smith Junior and can only come via LDS.

    On point 3 you seem to disagree with your cult. Do you agree or disagree with your cult on this?

    4. LDS teaches that you must be married in LDS or it does not count towards your fictional “time and eternity” marriages.

    On point 4 you seem to disagree with your cult. Do you agree or disagree with your cult on this?

    Now you know if you disagree with your cult on those 4 points you must feel that there is no “celestial kingdom” and you just might be booted from LDS, or put in some special program if you dare say such here in public. If you agree with your cult on these points, you ARE A LIAR and you don’t really feel non-LDS will enter the fictional “celestial kingdom”.

    Here’s what the truth is and if you desire to spare your soul from hell fire and the lake of fire, that your fictional notions of a “celestial kingdom” will be tossed into with Satan, you will come to this truth.

    John 3:16-21 (King James Version)

    16 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.

    17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

    18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

    19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

    20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

    21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

    Notice God sent His Only Begotten Son. God did not choose between some fictional “spirit children”. God did not have a son named Jesus and a son named Lucifer, just Jesus is the Only Begotten Son and that word “Begotten” does not mean Jesus being born of a virgin, but Firstborn of all creation and He is God (John 1) before Mary existed. He did not work His way to “god” status and neither did the Father, both were God always and none were before them and the Father was not birthed of any other god. Whoever believes on the Jesus Christ of the Bible, not of Joseph Smith Junior’s cult teachings, who so ever believes on the True Jesus as their ONLY means for salvation (not looking for hope in Mary either) will have eternal life. Those who don’t believer are already condemned and love darkness rather than light.

    Those who come to the TRUTH will reject Mormon and Roman Catholic doctrine. Both are LIES.

    So Steffielynn, are you ready to reject LDS doctrine today? If you did it would only be because God drew you to the truth. Claim LDS and you claim a lie.

  63. Karl said

    See, protestantism ultimately leads to the denial of God.

  64. Karl said

    Luther is undoubtedly the father of the Protestant rebellion and spiritual father of the Modern Apostasy from God. The object of this posting on Martin Luther is to give direct quotes from a man called a “great religious reformer” and to whom protestants trace back real origin of their respective churches. It provides a good idea of Luther’s true character, so that from his own words you see him for what he really was, that is a rebellious apostate, who abandoned the faith and led many into apostasy from God under the guise of “reformation” in order to follow his perverse inclinations. This should show the aspect of Martin Luther which Protestants and all alike so conveniently overlooked in these days of false ecumenism and intellectual dishonesty.

    On God Luther said: I look upon God no better than a scoundrel – Weimar, Vol. 1, Pg. 487. Cf. Table Talk, No. 963

    On Drunkenness Christ Taught (in the words of St. Paul):
    Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: Neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers: Nor the effeminate nor liars with mankind nor thieves nor covetous nor drunkards

    Luther teaches: We eat and drink to kill ourselves, we eat and rink up to our last farthing.

    On Pride Christ taught: And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled

    Luther teaches: St. Augustine or St. Ambrosius cannot be compared with me. What I teach and write remains true even though the whole world should fall to pieces over it

    On the Person of Christ Christ taught
    Which of you shall convince Me of sin? If I say the truth to you, why do not believe Me? He that is of God, hears the words of God. Therefore you hear them not, because you are not of God.

    Luther teaches: Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tell�s us. Was not everybody about Him saying: �Whatever has He been doing with her?� Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died. I have greater confidence in my wife and my pupils than I have in Christ. It does not matter how Christ behaved � what He taught is all that matters

    On Marriage and Women

    Christ taught: For this reason shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder. . . Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, commits adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, commits adultery.

    Luther said:
    If the husband is unwilling, there is another who is; if the wife is unwilling, then let the maid come.

    Suppose I should counsel the wife of an impotent man, with his consent, to giver herself to another, say her husband�s brother, but to keep this marriage secret and to ascribe the children to the so-called putative father. The question is: Is such a women in a saved state? I answer, certainly. It is not in opposition to the Holy Scriptures for a man to have several wives.

    Know that Marriage is an outward material thing like any other secular business. The body has nothing to do with God. In this respect one can never sin against God, but only against one�s neighbour. As to divorce, it is still a debatable question whether it is allowable. For my part I prefer bigamy to it. The word and work of God is quite clear, viz., that women are made to be either wives or prostitutes.

    In spite of all the good I say of married life, I will not grant so much to nature as to admit that there is no sin in it. .. no conjugal due is ever rendered without sin. The matrimonial duty is never performed without sin.

    On Lying: Luther teaches:
    What harm could it do if a man told a good lusty lie in a worthy cause and for the sake of the Christian Churches? To lie in a case of necessity or for convenience or in excuse, such lying would not be against God; He was ready to take such lies on Himself.

    On Sacred Scripture Christ taught:
    For I testify to every one that hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things that are written in this book.

    Luther teaches:
    to my mind it (the book of the Apocalypse) bears upon it no marks of an apostolic or prophetic character… Everyone may form his own judgment of this book; as for myself, I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it. If your Papist annoys you with the word (‘alone’ – Rom. 3:28), tell him straightway, Dr. Martin Luther will have it so: Papist and ass are one and the same thing. Whoever will not have my translation, let him give it the go-by: the devil’s thanks to him who censures it without my will and knowledge. Luther will have it so, and he is a doctor above all the doctors in Popedom.

    Luther had a perverse habit of freely falsifying scripture to justify his purposes.

    The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible. The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe. I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much and has in it a great deal of heathenish foolishness. Of very little worth is the Book of Baruch, whoever the worthy Baruch might be. …the epistle of St. James is an epistle full of straw, because it contains nothing evangelical.

    While Luther claimed for himself the right to interpret scripture according to his own view, and claimed that he was intelligent enough to judge anyone and everything by scripture alone, he openly affirms that We cannot claim to fathom completely the meaning of a single verse of Scripture; we succeed in apprehending only the A B C of it, and even that imperfectly. – Luther, Table-talk, trans. Gustave Brunet, Paris, Garnier, 1844, pg. 288.

    And again he states:
    Let no one believe himself competent to understand Holy Scripture, unless he has, for a hundred years, governed the Church with the Prophets, with Elijiah and Elisha, St. John the Baptist, Jesus Christ and the Apostles. -Luther, Table-talk, trans. Gustave Brunet, Paris, Garnier, 1844, pg. 290.

    While I leave to the reader to draw his own conclusions, it suffices to say that what Luther really was, and the picture that is presented of him today by modern scholars, Lutherans and Protestants alike is far from the truth. Given this fact, it’s not difficult to see how a nation like Germany was able to blindly follow a person like Hitler if it had previously so readily embrace a person like Luther.

    From Luther,s own words one is able to grasp the origin of the inversion of orders in modern society, which we see has prevailed in the modern world. Luther ushered in this new era of apostasy from God in his attempt to rationalize his own perversity and make of it the foundations for civil society. The erroneous principles upon which the modern world is based undeniably come from Luther himself and can never be reconciled to the teachings of the Gospel no matter what Luther might have thought.

    Lutherans out there, this, then, is the man to whom you have sold your souls. You follow a man who openly insulted, ridiculed and made fun of his Creator.

  65. Charles D. said

    Okay, Karl, I asked you nicely to shorten your diatribes and ravings. Why have you turned on Steff? She tried to comfort you yesstidy.

    You would do well to read IC’s comments about cults above, and measure your self proclaimed faith, because not all Catholics believe as you have sateted from time to time.

    Steff: I visited your bloglink on a dare and was completely taken aback by the heading on your link: I love Mormons so stinkin much” not exactly a ringing endorsement. What connotation did you intend that to have? I mean I have spoken kinder words than that to individuals that I didn’t consider especially close. The connotation I got is that “stinkin,” e.g., bad small, rotten onions, might look good on the outside, nut. woe be unto you on the inside.

    Okay, granted, you might mean well, but, you simply cannot take a cult and dress it in a pink dress, and send her to the prom. No one remember whom everyone else brought, but everyone remembers who brought the ugly girl to the prom.

    Also, who chose those colors for your Mormon banner? Pew-wee!

    Repent and serve God in spirit and in truth!

    Charles

  66. johnkaniecki said

    Independent Conservative,

    Hello hope you are well. I’m glad you made your position on abortion known. I had some confusion about how I thought you felt towards the candidates.

    I remember I was taking a class in semminary during the Bush/ Kerry election. There was a book being promoted called “Heather Has Two Mommies”. This book legitamized homosexuality and was taught to young children. I was certainly appalled at such a book. It presented the homosexual life style as natural and it was designed for children who were very young. To young to even question a teacher. As a result everyone in the class voted for Bush.

    I voted for Kerry in our mock election. Why? Because a child reading Heather Has Two Mommies is better than reading a book called Heather Died in A Nuclear War. You reap what you sow. Bush has been sowing hatred for a long time. That election really turned my stomach sick.

    I see politics as just another aspect to glorify God. It is a tool. Just like it is glorifying to God being honest in business it is glorifying to God to get a government that would do His will. I fully understand this is often so far out of our control it is extemely frustrating to the point of being futile. Yet it is a very necessary effort.

    As far as the scripture in Mark I certainly did take it out of context. Thanks for that one.

    I also think though we disagree with a thousand year kingdom of God on Earth. See the begining of Revelation 20 and hopefully we can start a fruitful conversation there. I do agree 1 Corinthians 15 is talking about the end of time. But I would feel that it is a paralell scripture to Revelation 20:12. This is a concept I have been working on recently. I have had some fruits in my study recently.

    Finally I would direct everyone’s attention to Mathew 25 and the sheeps and the goats. We must deliver the whole package. That is we must be faithful in words and deeds. James says if your brother is hungry and you say I wish you well and don’t give him food then that is meaningless. Love and compassion must be taught in word and deed.

    Karl please don’t take this comment with disrespect but I think your Church is a sad disgrace not only to God but to humanity. I know some people of the Catholic faith who are humble, dedicated servants of God. (Though very confused to be perfectly honest.) This unfortuanately is the rare exception.

    If you would look at what your Church has done over the years you would understand more. The only reason why your not imprisoning or killing those who disagree with you is that you are unable to so at this time.

    But I encourage you to stay in contact with us. It would be nice to get another point of view.

    Love,

    John

    PS I’m looking for some good books on the Prophets. Could anybody recommend some.

  67. John,

    I voted for Kerry in our mock election. Why? Because a child reading Heather Has Two Mommies is better than reading a book called Heather Died in A Nuclear War. You reap what you sow. Bush has been sowing hatred for a long time. That election really turned my stomach sick.

    I’m not going to respond to that, I just wanted to be sure others read it. And I hope they realize nobody has died in a nuclear war.

    As far as the scripture in Mark I certainly did take it out of context. Thanks for that one.

    I’m not perfect brother and if I come with the butter knife, please correct me 🙂 .

    I don’t think we disagree on what is to come, but rather have some differing views on what is for us in some political matters at the moment. And some of our brothers and sisters choose to take no involvement at all. I place it all at Romans 14. Because those differences are not of the essential nature we are seeing with Mormons and Roman Catholics who come here, or the Muslims and atheists you’re trying to help.

    I agree with Matthew 25 and Jesus said “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” A pagan is not a brother and that is why the private Christian communes of the early church were for the church and not the world. Saints were helping each other, not ever trying to feed the whole world for the sake of filling bellies. (This is the great error of men like Rick Warren. Locking up with anyone just to serve a hot meal, even when ministry is inhibited.) James was also speaking of “If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,”. The church is not about simply being a food pantry for those who reject Christ, the church seeks to take care of its own first and foremost. Others are aided in outreach ministry. That means, we’re giving them ministry and the food. The bread of the belly and the bread of life. If they don’t wish to hear ministry, let them get their bread for their belly elsewhere. That does not mean we won’t help them if they are on the side of the road near dead, but the world should know when the church comes to help, that it’s a package deal that includes ministry of the gospel. They don’t have to accept Christ, but we are to tell them about Him and if they don’t want to at least hear about Him, we’ve got plenty of others that need the food and are willing to listen. No we won’t watch an unbeliever die of starvation, but we have to help the sheep and those with an ear to hear first. When helping the starving we have to bring more than bread from the bakery. We’ve got to give them the bread of life, or our labor is in vain.

    The only reason why your not imprisoning or killing those who disagree with you is that you are unable to so at this time.

    Kind of like the cult of Muhammad (Islam) when you think about it.

  68. Charles,

    To each his own 🙂

    I love bright green 🙂

    I’ll comment more later, I’m about to go shopping for a BRIGHT green shirt 🙂 (im kidding, unless of course I find one that I love… i’ll be on the look out)

  69. johnkaniecki said

    Independent Conservative,

    Hello and thanks for your comments. I hope you are well. Up here in New Jersey we are expecting an Artic blast. That means very cold temperatures.

    That was a very interest comment regard Mathew 25. I looked up the Greek word and it indeed means brother or out of the womb. Thanks.

    Regarding Bush and Kerry and that election I have my suspicions that the whole thing was rigged. Both men were in Skull and Bones a satanic group. When events are played out in the future come to pass I feel most people will see the great tragedy that is to come. In hindsight I believe we will look back and see that was such a critical moment in history. So let please put of any conclusion or condemnations we have until that moment. For the record though I will say if John Kerry was elected president it would have been a tremendous disaster. I just think that before George is through we will experience a worse debacle.

    I liken these days to when Isaiah was preaching. He was calling the nation back to God but they refused to listen. In a sense that is what we are trying to do, call people to God. My political ideas are focused on that ideal alone.

    It is important to understand that there is only one gospel. Furthermore we are not to add or take away from it. We cannot offer fellowship to one who is in darkness. Yet still we are commanded to Love everyone. People like Karl and Steffielynne are among them. Yet we must recognize them as lost. The Word of God is something that can’t be tampered with. Who would dare to reprove God? Yet when you add books to his message and say that they are from Him falsely you are caught up in a lie. Or when you say somebody on Earth speaks for Him but the truth is he does’t then you lie.

    We have our disagreements here about doctrine and serious issues. Yet we are unified around the blood stained banner of Christ. We understand that the Bible is the Word of God. In essence we all agree on the message. In that is great hope for if we approach our task with humility we shall find God’s will and purpose.

    Love,

    JOhn

  70. I know God ordained who is an earthly governing authority regardless of whether I like them or not and His will and plan as noted in scripture will come to pass, Romans 13.

    Regarding Bush, I’ve already noted my greatest issue with him in this post and it even includes a Roman Catholic.

    Or when you say somebody on Earth speaks for Him but the truth is he does’t then you lie.

    John, with comments like that, I’m going to have to keep you a seat warm over here with the folks who have been called “mean”. I didn’t expect Eden was going to be added to our lot and was hustling to get her a chair, but I’ve got one waiting for you now John 🙂 . You spoke the truth there, in love.

    We have our disagreements here about doctrine and serious issues. Yet we are unified around the blood stained banner of Christ. We understand that the Bible is the Word of God. In essence we all agree on the message. In that is great hope for if we approach our task with humility we shall find God’s will and purpose.

    Well said.

    By the way, down south here, it’s just cold 🙂 . We say that till summer, then it’s hot 😉 .

    I used to live up in the north east and after enough of those “arctic blast” among other things I knew I needed to leave. New Jersey has way too many tolls. And if you get on the turnpike and mistakenly go in the truck lane, may the Lord be with you my brother 😆 .

  71. Charles D. said

    steffielynn:

    Thanks for not assigning any of the nice people here to hell today. In fact you were fairly mild-mannered considering……. Question for you: Why do you suppose Karl, whom you defended yesterday, when taunting the virgues of the Catholic Church, never once spoke to the problem of their clergy messing with little boys and less often little girls? Why do you suppose that is?

    AND,! In large measure, you do not speak to the virtues of Mr. Smith Sr. or Jr. Tell me your thoughts, in full details please.

    Charles

  72. Charles when have I ever assigned anyone to hell????

    Ok I have to get back to comment #65, most in the blog world who come to my blog get me. I’m a mommy, not a mom, or a mother, a mommy. I often squeeze my little ones and tell them I love them so “stinkin much”. I also use words like “totally” and “rad”. It’s just who I am. I’m a radtastic mother of 2.

    ANYWAYS, I really don’t care anymore what people think, if they don’t like my beliefs, oh stinkin well. 🙂 (but I will still defend it). And if you all don’t feel i’m in line with LDS beliefs well, you just don’t REALLY get what we believe!

    Yes, by nature I am nice. Most Mormons I have met are so much like me. Passionate, happy, and NICE. We totally click. Some are not, and some don’t always do the right thing. But that is their choice.

    I realize you all probably don’t really care who I am so i’ll move on.

    I don’t know why Anyone would do bad things to kids. I think it’s awful, but they will most certainly be taken care of by God!

    As for your last question if you could be more clear, (are you asking if I follow his teachings?) I would love to answer in detail

  73. Charles D. said

    Okay, answer then.

    To answer your question, in your letter to John, you assigned everyone (you said, exceot John) to hell. I wasn’t offended though, I was wondering if the hell which you referred to was on0line with LDS concept of “heaven,” so label me curious.

    Why aren’t you a mother? If you are one does saying that you’re not make you any less of one? I also see that stinkin, as part of your lexicon is interchangeable. So, if I say “those stinkin Mormons” would it be viewed as a term of endearment?

    Okay, I’m being silly now, but that’s what being layed up with a cold and NyQuill will do for me. 🙂 Can Mormans take NyQuil? Also, you never answered my questions about you and Karl’s rationale for excluding the seamier side of your doctrine!

    Charles

  74. Charles,
    Do I agree with 100% of EVERYTHING Joseph Smith taught, I would have to say no, not all of it. I think he (and many other prophets) mixed some of their own personal ideas into the mix. I disagree with those who did not allow Black people to hold the priesthood. It was the predudice of man not God. But Do I believe they were prophets? Yes, I do. Do I think they were perfect? NO I don’t.

    Charles seriously it is the Nyquil (yes mormons can take it when used as directed) I never asssigned ANYONE to hell. What I said was, in MY belief there will be more in Heaven then just Mormons,(meaning I believe YOU WILL be in heaven Charles NOT hell!)

    AND… what do you want me to include? When you speak of your Christian faith do you speak in detail including in your discussions the Christian crusades?

    And…I am a mother, (obviously) but my kids call me mommy. I was trying to give you insight into my life, but I guess it didn’t work.

    oh and Charles, I hope you feel better soon

  75. Coram Deo said

    Click here for a user friendly and absolutely accurate review of the “deeper truths” of the Mormon faith.

  76. Charles D. said

    Okay, let me see if I have it:

    Mother: Yes
    Charles: No Hell
    Smith,Sr&Jr: 50/50 (but prophets had to be right 100% of the time!
    NYQuil: Yes
    Crusades: No! (Okay, so I won’t start or participate in one.

    Got it!

    Charles

  77. Did anyone recognize how liar Steffielynn was all about speaking with me about her fake Celestial Kingdom that she wishes everyone would believe is Heaven but is not. How she claimed more than LDS people were going to her fake Celestial Kingdom.

    But then, when I presented her with her official cult’s doctrine, that shows plenty of reasons you have to be LDS to be considered eligible for the fake Celestial Kingdom and asked her to clear up the discrepancy in her statements, she has totally avoided me on the matter.

    If she’s so LDS-proud, why does she avoid speaking about it here? She’s openly talking about it on her own blog. Why does she say “ask a Mormon” and when we ask her to clear up something she avoids it? I figured she was going to have one of her fellow Mormon-cult buddies jump in and try to toss around some spin to obfuscate, but she’s back to talk about NyQuil.

    Perhaps she will answer my direct questions with yes or no answers and we can really see where she stands.

    She says:

    Do I agree with 100% of EVERYTHING Joseph Smith taught, I would have to say no, not all of it. I think he (and many other prophets) mixed some of their own personal ideas into the mix. I disagree with those who did not allow Black people to hold the priesthood. It was the predudice of man not God. But Do I believe they were prophets? Yes, I do. Do I think they were perfect? NO I don’t.

    That is the most unbiblical statement someone could make regarding a prophet. It’s not about a prophet being “perfect” in all their ways. It’s about what they claim is FROM GOD. Joseph Smith Junior made statements in his position of authority from his sermons and in cult scripture he wrote and called it the Word of God. Now in real scripture (that would be the Bible) a prophet is never to speak as if it is from God and EVER be wrong. If he’s not to be believed on a single statement made from the position of assigning that statement as truth from God, the “prophet” is a FALSE PROPHET. Today’s Mormons try and run a comb of political correctness through Joseph Smith Junior’s statements and still call him a “prophet”.

    Just a load of crap. It’s a stinkin’ ego front. Rather than admit they are wrong, suffer the consequences of the backlash they’d take for calling it all a cult, they try and cookie-cut it.

    But anytime you’re ready to answer my questions Steffielynn and make it known if you really do disagree with what is some of the core LDS doctrine. Doctrine you’ll get in big trouble disagreeing with in public. Please go right ahead. I’m sure some of your buddies are lurking, as you often lurk around this blog. Answer my questions and let them know how you really feel about the LDS doctrine.

  78. Charles, prayerfully you’ll have a swift recovery.

  79. IC
    Why would I want to answer any questions from someone who calls me a liar?

    And Why ask a question, that when I answer you will again just call me a liar, you are obviously all knowing, so what’s the point?

    Show some respect and I would LOVE to answer your questions. Call me a liar and I will just ignore you 🙂

  80. As I expected, a dodge.

    Although I use no different terms with her than I’ve used before when she responded, now she’s clamming up.

  81. Coram Deo said

    I frequently find the LDS faithful to be quick to play the “victim card” when anyone questions their beliefs.

    They publicly and vocally decry how kind and respectful they are of the beliefs of others, all while those same others rail against the poor, kind, innocent Mormons. In the real world don’t know true Christian who “rails” against the Mormons, but I do know many true Christians who care enough to boldly confront Mormon error with the truth in love praying that God Almighty (The One True Living God of the Holy Bible) might open their eyes to His glorious truth and save them out of the Mormon cult of salvation (a grossly carnal, fleshy “salvation”) earned by human works. The simple truth is that sinful man can’t add anything to the finished work of the cross which paid in full the sins of those who are miraculously born-again by the Spirit of God.

    If Mormons truly “believed every word” of the New Testament as they are quick to claim, then why would they believe that Jesus and Lucifer are brothers and are the spirit children of God the Father and his heavenly wife who Mormons also believe is a god? Why would they believe that God the Father, “Elohim”, had physical, incestuous, sex with his “spirit daughter” Mary in order to conceive Jesus in her womb?

    Why would Mormon Apostle Orson Hyde claim in “Journal of Discourses”, (4:259; 2:82) that ”Jesus married Mary, Martha and the other Mary at Cana whereby he could see his seed, before he was crucified”. Can’t Mormons see that absurd and unbiblical statements such as this are blasphemous?

    In truth Mormon theology espouses a radical departure from the Word of God as found in the Holy Bible even when taken completely separate from any of the orthodox, historical church creeds to which they object.

    Mormons can never be true Bible Christians because they refuse to give up their multiple gods and their multiple “sacred texts” and instead place their trust solely in God’s unique truth as found uniquely in the Holy Bible.

    If Mormons truly believed every word of the New Testament as they like to claim then they would heed Romans 15:4: For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures (referring to the Bible) we might have hope.

    AND 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture (referring to the Holy Bible) is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

    AND Romans 16:25-27 Now to him who is able to establish you by my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past, but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all nations might believe and obey him—to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen.

    None of the writings Mormons call “sacred” are actually sacred except for the Holy Bible, yet Mormons won’t give up their false scriptures because that would mean the end of the LDS organization, wouldn’t it?

    Amazingly the Book of Mormon is called a “sacred chronicle” even though it’s full of historical fabrications and outright lies as has been proven multiple times by multiple persons. Yet Joseph Smith urged Mormons to immerse themselves in the false Book of Mormon.

    Which leads us to the problem of the LDS “prophets” – so called. Why would Mormons follow a false prophet and heretic like Joseph Smith? We can know for certain that I’m not simply engaging in gratuitous ad hominem by calling Smith a false prophet and heretic because his own words identify him as such. Smith claimed the Book of Mormon (which has been revised several times) was “the most correct of any book”. Is the Book of Mormon truly the “most correct of any book”? Is the Book of Mormon more authoritative than the Bible? Why did it need revisions after it was “the most correct”?

    For his claims to be true Joseph Smith would have to be a prophet on par with the prophets of the Holy Bible, in fact higher because he claimed to receive newer revelation from God for this “last dispensation”.

    Yet if he were a truly a prophet of God why would there be so many discrepancies even within the Mormon “sacred texts” themselves?

    It ought to be obvious to any intellectually honest person that the basic and foundational tenets and underpinnings of Mormonism clearly make it distinct from Biblical Christianity.

    Have you ever wondered:

    1. If Gods are individuals who have passed through mortality and have progressed to Godhood, how has one person of the Trinity (the Holy Spirit) attained Godhood without getting a body? (See Acts 5:3,4)

    2. If Gods are individuals who have passed through an earth life to attain Godhood, how is it that one person of the Trinity (Jesus Christ) was God before He received a body or passed through earth life? (Matt. 1:23 and Hebrews 10:5)

    3. If the Book of Mormon really contains the fullness of the Gospel, why does it not teach the doctrine of “eternal progression”? (See D&C 20:8,9)

    4. God said, “Is there a God beside me? Yea, there is no God; I know not any”. How can there be Gods who are Elohim’s ancestors? Surely an all-knowing God would know this and wouldn’t speak falsehoods. (See Isa. 44:8 and Journal of Discourses Vol. 1, pg. 123)

    5. How can any men ever become Gods when the Bible says, “Before me there was no god formed, neither shall there be after me”? (Isaiah 43:10)

    6. If Adam is the “only God with whom we have to do”, did Adam create himself? (Journal of Discourses Vol. 1, pg. 50, 51)

    7. Joseph Smith stated that without the ordinances and authority of the priesthood no man can see the face of God and live (D & C 84:21, 22). He also said that he saw God in 1820 (Joseph Smith 2:17). Joseph Smith, however, never received any priesthood until 1829 (D&C 13). How did he see God and survive? In which was he in error: his revelation in D & C 84:21, 22 or his experience in the grove?

    8. If a spirit is a being without a body (See Luke 24:39), why do Mormons teach that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones? (See John 4:24)
    9. If the Father is Elohim and Jesus is Jehovah (as the Mormons teach), how does a Mormon explain Deuteronomy 6:4, which in the Hebrew says, “Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our Elohim is one Jehovah”?

    10. If the Book of Mormon contains the fullness of the Gospel, why doesn’t it teach that God was once a man?

    11. If Mormonism is the restored church, which is based upon the Bible, why are Mormon leaders so quick to state that the Bible is “translated wrong” when faced with some conflict between the Bible and Mormonism?

    12. If Jesus was conceived as a result of a physical union between God and Mary, how was Jesus born of a virgin? (Journal of Discourses Vol. 1, page 50)

    13. Why did Christ not return in 1891 as Joseph Smith predicted? (History of the Church, Vol. 2 page 182).

    14. Journal of Discourses Vol. 2, page 210 says Jesus was being married to Mary and Martha in Cana. Why then was he INVITED to his own wedding? (John 2:1,2)

    15. Why does the Mormon church teach that there is no eternal hell when the Book of Mormon teaches that there is? (I Nephi 14:3, II Ne. 9:16;28: 21-23, Mosiah 3:25, Alma 34:35, Heleman 6:28 and 3:25,26).

    16. How can Mormons teach that the repentant thief was not saved when the Book of Mormon states that Paradise is where the righteous go? (Luke 23:43, Alma 40:12, 16)

    17. How did Nephi with a few men on a new continent build a temple like Solomon’s while Solomon needed 163,300 workmen and seven years to build his temple? (See I Kings 5:13-18 and II Nephi 5:15-17)

    18. If the book of Mormon is true, why hasn’t a valid geography been established for the book?

    19. Why was Joseph Smith still preaching against polygamy in October 1843 after he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy? (D & C 132; and History of the Church Vol. 6, page 46, or Teachings of the Prophet, page 324)

    20. If Lehi left Jerusalem before 600 B.C., how did he learn about synagogues? (See II Nephi 26:26)

    21. If the Book of Mormon is true, why do Indians fail to become white when they become Mormons? (II Nephi 30:6 – prior to 1981 revision)

    22. What kind of chariots did the Nephites have in 90 B.C. some 1500 years before the introduction of the wheel on the Western Hemisphere? (Alma 18:9)

    23. How do Mormons account for the word “church” in the Book of Mormon, about 600 B.C., which was centuries before the beginning of the Church on the day of Pentecost? (I Nephi 4:26)

    24. How do Mormons account for the italicized words in the King James Version (indicating their absence in the Hebrew and Greek) being found in the Book of Mormon? (A comparison of Mosiah 14 and Isaiah 53 will provide at least 13 examples)

    25. How did the French word “adieu” get into the Book of Mormon? (Jacob 7:27)

    26. Was it right or wrong for Solomon to have many wives? (See Jacob 2:24; D & C 132:38,39) Which is it?
    27. If polygamy was a provision for increasing population rapidly, why did God give Adam only one wife?

    28. D&C 129:4, 5 says, “When a messenger comes saying he has a message from God, offer him your hand and request him to shake hands with you. If he be an angel he will do so, and you will feel his hand.” How can this test distinguish between an angel of God and a Jehovah’s Witness missionary…or a Mormon Elder.

    29. If Joseph Smith was a true prophet, why did he fail to realize that “Elias” is the N.T. form of the name “Elijah”? (D & C 110:12,13 and 1 Kings 17:1 and James 5:17) How could Elijah (Elias) have appeared to Joseph Smith in the Kirkland Temple as two different people?

    30. If children have no sins until they are eight years old, why are they baptized at age eight to wash away non-existent sins? (See Moroni 8:

    31. How could the Garden of Eden have been in Missouri when the Pearl of Great Price declares that it was in the vicinity of Assyria and had the Euphrates and Hiddekel Rivers in it? (See P of GP Moses 3:14 and D&C 116 and 117; Genesis 2:8-15)

    32. Brigham Young said, “The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy”. (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, page 269) Why did the Mormons yield to the pressure of the government and stop practicing polygamy?

    33. Heber C. Kimball stated, “We are the people of Deseret, she shall be no more Utah: we will have our own name”. Why did this prophecy fail? (J of D. Vol. 5, page 161)

    34. How did Joseph Smith carry home the golden plates of the Book of Mormon, and how did the witnesses lift them so easily? (They weighted about 230 lbs. Gold, with a density of 19.3 weighs 1204.7 lbs. Per cubic foot. The plates were 7” x 8” by about 6”. See Articles of Faith, by Talmage, page 262, 34th Ed.)

    35. When Christ died, did darkness cover the land for three days of for three hours? (See Luke 23:44 and III Nephi 8:19, 23)

    36. If the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, why have the Mormons changed it? (There have been over 3,000 changes in the Book of Mormon, exclusive of punctuation changes)

    37. If God speaks through a prophet, why do Mormons vote on whether or not to receive and authorize it?

    38. It has been established that the “Sensen” manuscript was simply a common Egyptian burial papyrus. Why do the Mormons still accept the Book of Abraham which was translated from that manuscript?

    39. Why is it that no other writings have been found in the language of “Reformed Egyptian”, the supposed language of the Book of Mormon plates? Is there evidence that such a language really existed?

    40. Joseph Smith said that there are men living on the moon who dress like Quakers and live to be nearly 1000 years old. Since he was wrong about the moon, is it safe to trust him regarding the way to heaven? (See The Young Woman’s Journal, Vol 3, pages 263, 264.)
    41. Why do Mormons not study Hebrew and Greek so that they can intelligently discuss the accuracy of the translation of the Bible?

    42. Joseph Smith prepared fourteen Articles of Faith. Why has the original No. 11 been omitted?

    43. According to Hebrews 7:24, the Melchizedek Priesthood is not transferable. Why do Mormons pass it from one to another?

    44. If Mormonism came as a revelation from God, why are the Mormon Temple Oaths almost identical to the oaths of the Masonic Lodge?

    45. Why did the Nauvoo House not stand forever and ever? (D&C 124:56-60)

    46. If genealogies are important, why does the New Testament tell Christians to avoid them? (I Timothy 1:4; Titus 3:9)

    47. The Bible says, “The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin”. Why did Brigham Young say that there are some sins which can be atoned for only by the shedding of ones own blood.

    48. God rejected the fig leaf aprons which Adam and Eve made. Why do Mormons memorialize the fall by using fig leaf aprons? (Gen. 3:21)

    49. Why do Mormons insist that Ezekiel 37:15-22 is about two books instead of about two kingdoms as God Himself explained in verse 22?

    50. If Acts 3:20, 21 is a prophecy about the restoration of Mormonism, why didn’t Jesus return in 1830?

    51. Revelation 14:6,7 is part of the body of prophecy about the future Great Tribulation. How could that passage have been fulfilled by Moroni in 1830?

    52. In light of Ezekiel 28:13-15 and Hebrews 1:5, how can Satan and Jesus be brothers (as the Mormons teach)? (note: Satan was created)

    53. If no person ever receives the Holy Spirit before baptism or without the laying on of hands, how does a Mormon explain the case of Cornelius? (See Acts 10:44-47)

    54. If baptism for the dead was a Christian ceremony, why did Paul use the pronoun “they” rather than “we” or “ye”? Why did he exclude himself and other Christians when referring to it? (I Cor. 15:29)

    55. Since the Bible says that a Bishop should be the husband of one wife, how can Mormons claim that polygamy is proper for New Testament Christians? (I Timothy 3:2)

    56. Why does the Mormon church teach that the broad way leads to the Terrestrial Heaven when Jesus taught that it leads to destruction? (Matthew 7:13, 14)

    57. Are you sincere enough about your personal salvation that you will carefully study the following Bible references to discover the Bible’s way to salvation?

    John 10:9; I Corinthians 1:18; Ephesians 2:8-10; Colossians 1:12-14; Romans 4:8; I Peter 2:24; Acts 16:31; John 1:12; I John 5:12, 13; Romans 5:1 and Romans 8:1

    I would ask the sincere Mormon reader a question: Are you courageous enough to personally receive the Lord Jesus Christ into your heart and follow His truth regardless of ridicule, antagonism or persecution including being cast out of the LDS as an apostate?

    Sadly most Mormons are so immersed in the false teachings of the LDS church that they are capable of simply ascribing any and all efforts to point toward the singular truth of scripture as “tricks of the devil”. Yet wouldn’t that be an interesting trick for the devil to play – to point men and women toward the absolutely authoritative Word of God, the Holy Bible, and then encourage them to humbly and prayerfully place their trust in Him and Him alone?

    Only the One True Living God, the Infinite Creator and Judge of the Universe, the one and only God in all existence, can open the eyes of the deceived in order that they might be redeemed by grace through faith alone in the Jesus Christ of the Holy Bible. This is true for all men, in all places, at all times to the glory of the Risen Lord forever, amen.

  82. Karl said

    Mormonism is a joke and here is why.

    Mormonism was founded by Joseph Smith in 1830. He claimed an angel named Moroni (moron from hell?) told him to found a new religion, and to find two golden plates buried under a rock somewhere in New York. Smith claimed he found them and deciphered the inscription on them, and that became the Book of Mormon. Of course, the plates conveniently disappeared after that and were never found again.
    Now, Mormons claim that the Book of Mormon is yet another gospel other than those which are included within Holy Scripture. We know this because the very first page behind the cover of the Book of Mormon says: The Book of Mormon Another Testament of Jesus Christ. This an open admission that they preach another gospel. Not only that but their ‘gospel’ supposedly came from an angel.

    But this is in direct conflict with Galatians 1:8 which warns that, …But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel to you other than that which we have preached, let him be anathema. As if that were not enough, St Paul reiterated in Galatians 1:9 for emphasis. It is as if he had a clear premonition of the rise of Mormonism and wrote those verses especially directed against them.

    Mormons claim that Moroni is an angel, yet we know that not one apostle ever preached this strange ‘Book of Mormon’. How then, can Mormons ever reconcile this, since it is clearly evident that the very roots of Mormonism are in direct contradiction of Holy Scripture? Show me a Mormon who can ever reconcile the book of Mormon with Galatians 1:8-9. Furthermore, Scripture clearly teaches that Christ was the last of many prophets before Him, according to Hebrews 1:1-2, GOD, who at sundry times and in divers manners spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all in these days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the world…

    Contrast those verses from Hebrews with this quote from the introduction to the Book of Mormon:
    …that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world, that Joseph Smith is his revelator and prophet in these last days… Who do these fellows think they are kidding? Should we ignore Hebrews 1:1-2 or the infernal teachings Mormonism?

    And this, In giving us his Son, his only Word (for he possesses no other), he spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word – and he has no more to say. . . because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the All Who is His Son. Any person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be guilty not only of foolish behaviour but also of offending him, by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty. – St John of the Cross, The Ascent of Mount Carmel 2, 22, 3-5

    Hebrews 1:1-2, definitively inform us that there will be no more divine revelation revealed after the teaching by the Word of GOD, Jesus Christ, to His Apostles. Divine revelation ended when the last Apostle died. So, how could Joseph Smith be a prophet after Jesus Christ, yet Scripture says the opposite? And from whom did these revelations of Joseph Smith really come?

    Either Holy Scripture is not to be believed, or Joseph Smith was a false prophet. Joseph Smith was as false as they come. And so are ALL founders of sects, protestant or otherwise.

  83. So in conlusion Karl believes I will go to hell and so will all of you.

    You all believe Karl will burn in Hell and so will I.

    I believe that you all have a sad view of a loving Father in Heaven, and one day you will see how amazing and wonderful and LOVING He is.

  84. Karl said

    Talking about hell, the mystery of predestination reminds us that we can do nothing without the grace of Christ(John 15:5). In 1 Cor. 4:7, St Paul says what hast thou,that thou hast not received? Predestination, however, does not make superfluous our own efforts because adults must merit eternal life. No one is in heaven unless he has died in the state of grace. No one can go to hell except by his own fault. It is true that God is infinitely merciful. But being equally finite in all His attributes, He is also infinitely just. And hell is Divine Justice. We are heirs of God, coheirs with Christ, if we suffer with Him that we may be glorified with Him.

  85. Coram Deo said

    We must ask ourselves, does our heavenly Father love sin?

    According to His Word He hates sin with a perfect hatred. How can this be? How can a God Who IS LOVE also hate perfectly? It’s because of something else that God is; JUST.

    I submit to you He must hate sin and all unrighteousness because HE is LOVE. Perfect love cannot tolerate sin and unrighteousness because these are compatible with God’s absolutely HOLY, PURE, PERFECT, RIGHTEOUS and JUST nature.

    The Bible says God is angry with the wicked every day. If our conception from God is that He is so loving that He simply overlooks justice then we make him an unjust and unrighteous King. Some would have Him winking at all unrighteousness and wickedness waving His hand and patting abomination upon its head with holy blessing and tacit approval. God forbid!

    Even in man’s sinful, corrupted state we can easily see the problem with the concept of love being elevated over the concept of justice. Consider:

    What if a man entered your home and slowly, deliberately, and gleefully slaughtered your entire family in front of your eyes in the most heinous and perverse manner you can imagine. Now, consider that this man is not only remorseless of this evil deed, but that he in fact brags to everyone he knows about the event, providing them not only with the gruesome details and external facts of his crime, but embellishing it with how wonderful it made him feel inside, how powerful and energized he felt, what a rush it gave him. In fact he brags of it in such a manner as to describe himself as an all around swell guy without even a hint that he recognizes that he’s done anything wrong whatsoever. It’s as though he’s describing a highly successful fishing trip or a thrilling win in a game of pick-up basketball.

    Now consider that you aren’t the first unfortunate family upon whom this evil man has perpetrated this deed, but you’re one of an innumerable host of victims. You might expect such a man to be detained by the authorities and incarcerated. You might expect such a man to stand before a judge who would sentence him to death, or at least a life of incarceration where he couldn’t perpetrate such things on any more poor victims. Yet imagine that the justice system did no such thing, but rather spoke of love and forgiveness and how wrong it would be to punish the perpetrator for his crimes because it would not be loving to treat him thusly.

    What love is this? Any sane person would cry out for justice in such a situation and this is precisely why all human societies have a temporal criminal justice system.

    Now the analogy above is written from the perspective of human violence done to another human, which is undoubtedly sinful and wicked, yet how much more is the offense to be reckoned when the violence is done against the absolutely HOLY, PURE, PERFECT, RIGHTEOUS and JUST Infinte Creator and Judge of the universe?

    God cannot simultaneously be loving and be unjust. God’s holy justice demands punishment for sins, and unless one’s sins were paid for by Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary then one is condemned already. Yet Jesus Christ paid only for the sins of HIS OWN on that cross and only those who belong to Him by grace through faith in Him alone, and not of works lest any man should boast, are miraculously “born-again” of the Spirit of God and translated from spiritual death unto spiritual life. These are made a new creature in Christ and become partakers of His divine and eternal life. To deny divine justice against sin is to call Jesus Christ a liar since He himself spoke of certain judgment to come. In fact this concept is in full view throughout the Holy Bible.

    The Bible is clear that there are only two types of people in the world – the saved and the lost. The redeemed and the unredeemed. The forgiven and the unforgiven. The blessed and the cursed. Those who will go to heaven and those who will go to hell. The born-again and the damned. Those who belong to the family of God by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone and everyone else.

    Which are you?

  86. Karl said

    Who?

  87. Charles D. said

    Steff, Yesterday, you asked me when was the last time you assigned anyon to hell. Right about…..NOW!

    “So in conlusion Karl believes I will go to hell and so will all of you.”

    Unfortunate as it may sound, Yes. You for the reason Karl stated in his earlier, but most elegeant post to date, and Karl for much the same reason if you were to substitute “Smith” “and Maroni” with “church” and “pope”
    I am unable to find any place in the Bible where there would be a “pope” or, that a “confessional preist” could intercede on behalf of anyone. That subtitutionary ploy is going to evenuate in substituting heaven for hell, no purgetory, no hades, just he double hockey sticks.

    Steff; God will that none shall perish, but that they come to know the saving of our Lord Jesus Christ. All of the lovey-dovey, feel good, thing that you do is nothing less than sin sickness and only Christ is the cure. I pray to God that you do not indoctrine your loving children in that cult or let those evil credants have access to them. Remember this one thing: If HE (God) spared not the holy angels who once were holders of high estate, or Sodom, do you think God is going to be pitiful to the Mormon Cult??? Do you? Speak child while there is time!

    You said we read the same Bible and believe in the same Christ; which by the way will be held against you also, but you will not be able to answer Him on Judgement Day because “A liar cannot tarry in the sight of God” thus not said Charles, but rather, the Bible you claim to read. On that Day do you foolishly believe that any of the deamons responding on your blog sight is going to give a tinkers dam about you or your family? Amaze yourself, get one of the Bibles you have claimed to have read – NO! better yet google the quotations I have captured here test it, you owe it to yourself and your family. Then get back to me.

    Karl, my dear neice is catholic and she is one of the dearest people to me. I don’t know why or how you arrived at the views that you have. But everyone discount your touting you also, fail to addess issues that you can speak about, rather going for things that you do not know about. Thou answer me this:

    Do you know if all of the preists that abused all of those innocent babies, for so many years, confessed to a preist?

    Was the Catholic Church right (by God’s standard) to have hid the preist, lie to the police, than make the victims fight for redress of the preist and some bishops sins?

    Can mere man be trusted to do the things you portray and the status which you have elevated, not Jesus Christ, and Him crucified, but the Catholic church?

    You condemned yourself more times than I care to count, each one, extremely sad.

    Sekk Christ while He can be found, both of you!

    Charles
    You all believe Karl will burn in Hell and so will I.

    I believe that you all have a sad view of a loving Father in Heaven, and one day you will see how amazing and wonderful and LOVING He is.

  88. Charles D. said

    “demons responding on your blog site”

    Speed not typos are responsible for the above. Remove the entire sentence if you like, and the thrust is still there. God wants you to know. This is serious business folks; where you spend eternity depends on your action or inaction.

  89. Job said

    https://healtheland.wordpress.com/2008/01/19/abrahamic-faith-the-god-of-abraham-is-triune-not-oneness/

  90. So ya’ll believe I will burn in hell, I get that. But the thing is I disagree. Like ALL of you have said, you can’t EARN your way into heaven. My heart sincerly LOVES God, so even IF you were correct, He will judge me by my HEART, not what I did or did not believe.

    I know you think I’m a liar, and a devil and all kinds of other things, but I also know that you are looking out for me, and I appreciate it. I know you all really believe these things, and I’m sure you really don’t want to see me burn in Hell forever, I call you mean because some of the things you say are very hurtful, and infact untrue, and I am the most sincere honest person ever! I really do belive everything I write here. I am not trying to mislead you. I really do love my Heavenly Father, I really do believe in Jesus Christ.

    Anyways, Again I sincerly thank you for looking out for me, even IC who has a HORRIBLE approach 🙂

    Charles, I’ve reread some of your comments and in the heat of discussion I missed something. I laughed when I read it again, when you said you were “dared” to go to my blog. Dared??? Who dared you? I think that is kinda funny. 🙂

    Anyways Charles, Your approach is also a bit rude sometimes, but like you, I think you are RAD! 🙂

    So even though I’m a crazy devil Mormon, you all have grown on me, and I hope we will have many more discussions!!!!!!

    Love to all Steffielynn

  91. Charles , in comment 87 you said I assigned people to hell, but that is not what I said, I was talking about what KARL AND YA”LL BELIEVE, what I believe is that…..

    “I believe that you all have a sad view of a loving Father in Heaven, and one day you will see how amazing and wonderful and LOVING He is.”

    Basically I believe that MOST will end up in heaven, because I believe that God loves us all, and has prepared a way for all his children to get back to him!

    So again, I have assigned NO ONE to hell, and I clarify this because I can’t stand it when someone says “so and so is going to hell”

    I think you misunderstand a lot of what I say. Maybe I am not being clear. So I hope I can speak more clearly from now on….

  92. Coram Deo said

    My heart sincerly LOVES God, so even IF you were correct, He will judge me by my HEART, not what I did or did not believe.

    The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? (Jeremiah 17:9)

    For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: (Matthew 15:19)

    I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. (John 8:24)

    I am the most sincere honest person ever!

    God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. (Romans 3:4)

    They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. (Romans 3:12)

    Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. (1 John 2:22)

  93. Coram Deo said

    Steffielynn – how did you become “the most sincere honest person ever”? By what means or process did you attain to the absolute pinnacle and perfection of the characteristics of sincerity and honesty?

    Do you really believe that you are “the most sincere honest person ever”?

    Are you truly “the most sincere honest person ever”?

  94. Charles D. said

    Steff

    I don’t mean this in any disrespectful way, but, what is your educational backgroud?

    You mentioned my comment at # 87. After I signed my name, it was quite unbeknowst to me that I left 2 issues that I had intended to address. After I had submitted, those 2 items stood alone. Please read them, please. Accident or coincedent?

    You truly seem like a nice person, but, niceness will not get you into heaven. If you have read the Bible as you said you have, then, go back to the OT; maybe God wrote it just for you. I have no doubt that God is a loving heavenly father, however, if you have not read about the wrath of God, then, you are in for a rude awakening!

    Does it mean anything to you that God spared neither the angels or His own Son? Do you think He did those things to make nice for you so you can sit on your sacriligious butt, saying I’m on my way to heaven anyhow? Thy fool!

    I was dared to visit your blog site because the daree thought I would be absolutely amazed by the laxiety in which you approach “salvation.” Lo and behgold, I visit and found a whole cackle of sin sick visitors. Please do the favor I asked and if you have time, please read and take to heart comment #92.

    Charles 😦

  95. Coram Deo said

    Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; 22Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: 23For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: (Romans 3:20-24)

    LDS doctrine has gone to great lengths to minimize the concept of sin in the lives of the members of the LDS church:

    by watering down the definition of sin.
    by calling most sins trespasses, mistakes, oversights, etc.
    by focusing its members on a process of progression.
    by asserting that in most cases deliberate action is required to commit a sin.

    Instead of Mormons seeing their sin, they are conditioned to see their worthiness. They place great stock in not having committed a particular sin. Mormons are conditioned to build themselves up by seeing the sins they do not commit. In a word, Mormonism conditions a person to focus on self, self worth, self progression, self reliance.

    Mormonism’s Plan of Salvation is contingent on an individual’s progression in worthiness, that is, self righteousness. Mormons are conditioned to think that as they avoid sins, they are, in some way, building a positive bank account of their own righteousness. To aid them in this, the LDS church adds a myriad of commands and requirements to God’s Word. Some of these are held in higher regard than biblical commands. Many are easily kept because they deal only with an action and not with the attitude of the heart (e.g. don’t drink coffee). By providing commands a Mormon can keep, these additions actually help Mormons perceive themselves as worthy. For instance, both abandoning pornography and not drinking coffee results in a Mormon feeling that he or she has made a leap in self righteousness.

    In this way Mormonism puts filters around Mormons. These filters work to distort the Gospel message, even to prevent its message from being ‘heard’. Not understanding God’s message has as damaging an effect as never hearing it. Jesus makes this point in his explanation to his disciples of the parable of the sower:

    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. (Matthew 13:19)

    God’s true requirement for salvation (attaining to eternal life instead of eternal damnation) is absolute perfection. The Holy Bible plainly teaches:

    God’s absolute demand for perfection.
    God’s universal definition of sin.
    The rebellious nature of sin.
    The consequence of sin.
    The severity of even one sin.
    The breadth of God’s commands.
    How prevalent sin is in a person’s life.

    Based on God’s requirements we can see the futility and utter folly of the LDS plan of progression. What does the Holy Bible have to say about sin and sinners?

    For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. (John 3:20-21)

    Matthew 5:48 states God’s requirement for perfection:

    Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

    The Apostle John provides a universal definition of sin:

    Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (1 John 3:4)

    In short, any violation of any command of God is a sin.

    Sin is serious not only because of how often we sin, but also because of whom we sin against. Whenever we sin we are, in reality, sinning against God. King David, even though he committed adultery, confessed that he had sinned against God.

    We can illustrate the magnitude of sin’s seriousness by showing its relative impact based against whom the sin is committed. This short story illustrates this: “Think of a young man who takes a swing at his brother. His brother might swing back, but that will probably be the extent of the consequences. Now think of that very same young man taking that very same swing at a police officer. Same swing, but the consequences are a whole lot more serious. Take it one step further. Imagine that young man taking that very same swing at the President of the United States. Same swing, but even more consequences. The seriousness of the action often is determined by whom the action affects.”

    Now we can witness that sin is against God! That sin is rebellion against the majestic Lord! That’s serious! When we do not follow the precepts (commands) of God, we sin against our Maker.

    The consequence of sin is the opposite of God’s gift of eternal life, namely eternal death.

    For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 6:23)

    In Mormonism, eternal death is not necessarily a horrendous thing. Mormon doctrine claims that any eternal destination other than the highest kingdom is an eternal death, but is better than life on earth. The Holy Bible demonstrates the falseness of this claim.

    But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. (Revelation 21:8)

    The wages of sin, death, earns people a place in the lake of fire and brimstone!

    God views any rebellion as fatal. Breaking one command is as bad as breaking every command.

    For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. (James 2:10)

    Christ’s requirement is to be as perfect as Heavenly Father. Only absolute perfection avoids the penalty of sin. All others are cursed.

    For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. (Galatians 3:10)

    And God will deal harshly with the cursed.

    Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: (Matthew 25:41)

    The Holy Bible continues providing evidence of sin’s breadth and depth. First, we sin in our thoughts and in our words, as well as in our deeds:

    Master, which is the great commandment in the law? 37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. (Matthew 22:36-40)

    Man is directed to keep these greatest commandments, and all the others which ‘hang’ on them, in our hearts, our souls, and mind. In fact, when stating the greatest command; Jesus does not even discuss actions. The core of sin is in our hearts, not in our actions. Sinful actions may or may not follow sinful thoughts. We will look again at these “greatest commandments” in the list of sins.

    Second, not only do we sin by breaking God’s commands (sins of commission), we also sin when we don’t do the positive things God commands us to do (sins of omission).

    Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. (James 4:17)

    Third, we can and do sin unintentionally

    Ye shall have one law for him that sinneth through ignorance, both for him that is born among the children of Israel, and for the stranger that sojourneth among them. (Numbers 15:29)

    Fourth, we are not even aware of every sin we commit.

    Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults. (Psalm 19:12)

    We can use Paul as an example of the prevalence of sin in a person’s life. Paul offers his own personal confession of the prevalence of sin in his life. He references both sins of commission and omission. He makes it clear that because of his flesh (sinful nature) he will continue to sin. He says sin lives (dwelleth) in him!

    For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. 19For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. 20Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. (Romans 7:18-20)

    God offers many expressions of the futility of attempting to gain eternal life through obedience to his laws. God states this futility outright, calling such people “cursed” (see Galatians 3:10 above). He demonstrates it by giving laws we can never continuously keep (see Matthew 22:36-40 above). He makes a single transgression the same as breaking all his commands (see James 2:10 above). In addition he tells us that he gave us commands so that sin can increase!

    Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: (Romans 5:20)

    He tells us no one has ever been sinless or will ever stopped sinning.

    For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; (Romans 3:23)

    If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. (1 John 1:8)

    For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not. (Ecclesiastes 7:20)

    He tells us that even our good works are corrupted by our sin, calling them “as filthy rags”.

    But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
    (Isaiah 64:6)

    Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. (Matthew 5:21-22)

    We sin not only when we murder, but when we are unjustly angry. Even if this anger takes no action, it is still a sin against God. If we feel a flash of anger at a team mate because he took the shot instead of passing us the ball, we sin. If we resent our spouse, if only for a moment, because he left his dirty dish on the counter instead of putting it in the dishwasher, we sin. When we yell angrily, and out of patience at our children, we sin. When we are angry at a coworker because she honestly forgot a meeting, we sin. Sinful action need not occur; these sins are present whenever such thoughts are in our hearts!

    Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. (Matthew 5:27-28)

    We sin not only when we commit adultery, but when we lust. Even if this feeling takes no outward form, and we keep it to ourselves, it is still a sin against God. If we feel that tingling in the loins when we see a young person at the beach, we sin. When we fantasize about a sexy movie star, or a sports figure, we sin.

    Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. (Matthew 5:38-39)

    Say not, I will do so to him as he hath done to me: I will render to the man according to his work. (Proverbs 24:29)

    We sin when we retaliate, even if the injury done us was wrong (evil). When someone insults us and we fire an insult back, or even if we say nothing, but later get even by telling others bad things about the person, we sin. When we are cut off in traffic and think a private “I hope you get yours”, we sin.

    Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; (Matthew 5:43-44)

    We sin when we do not love our neighbor. As seen in the parable of the Good Samaritan, all men are our neighbors. We sin when we do not love our enemy. These commands are not referring to the emotion of love, but to the action of love.

    Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, 5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; 6Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; 7Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. 8Charity never faileth: (1 Corinthians 13:4-8)

    Love never fails (charity in the King James Version); therefore, we sin every time we fail to perform a loving act for our neighbor or our enemy (i. e. any of the actions referred to by these passages!). We are also to pray for our enemies, when we don’t; we sin. When we don’t sincerely want the best for our enemies we are sinning. Jesus prayed to his Father to forgive those who had put him on the cross. When we do less for our enemies, we sin.

    Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. (Matthew 6:1)

    We sin when we perform a “good” work for the purpose of inflating ourselves. Such a work is not seen as “good” by God, but hypocritical. A good work is not defined so much by the action as by the heart!

    Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. (Matthew 15:7-9)

    Paying a tithe to keep a temple recommend makes the tithe a sin. Accepting a calling because refusing it would make you look bad, turns the fulfillment of the calling into sin. We may be able to fool others, sometimes even ourselves; but God can see into our hearts.

    Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: (Matthew 6:19)

    We sin when, regardless of how much we may give to God, if there is something we own that we would be unwilling to part with. This might include position, job, income, recreation, money, leisure, time, comfort, hobby, investments, or house. If any of these worldly things become more important or gets in the way of serving God with our time, talents, and treasures; we sin. Every time we fail to use our treasures to glorify God, we sin. God does not want us to be friends of the world (that is, love our worldly life), when we are; we sin. When we are so comfortable that we don’t want to serve the Lord, give to the Lord, or be with the Lord, we are sinning.

    He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal. (John 12:25)

    Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? (Matthew 6:25)

    We sin when we worry. When we worry about our finances, we sin. When we worry about our popularity, we sin. When we worry about our appearance, we sin. When we worry about our health, we sin. When we worry about whether our home will impress our visitors, we sin. When we worry about whether we are good enough, we sin. When we worry about whether we will gain eternal life, we sin. God wants us to cast all our cares on him. He wants us to trust in him and his promises.

    Cast thy burden upon the LORD, and he shall sustain thee: he shall never suffer the righteous to be moved. (Psalm 55:22)

    Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you. (1 Peter 5:7)

    When we worry about our sin, worry about whether we’re forgiven, we sin.

    Judge not, that ye be not judged. (Matthew 7:1)

    This passage is often misunderstood. A person is not ‘judging’ when he or she tells another about God’s decrees. Say a person has a friend who is living with another person as ‘man and wife’ outside of marriage; it is a loving act to say “What you are doing is a sin against God and will affect your relationship with him”. In this situation the focus is on the act, the message is that it is against God’s decrees and has consequences. Pointing out those consequences is not ‘judging’ in the context of this passage.

    God’s command here deals with judging, or making assumptions about, another person’s intentions or motives. In this case the focus is on the person, on the contents of the person’s heart. Only God can judge another person’s heart. When we think or say “She did that just so she would look good” or “He did that on purpose, he thinks he is better than me”, we sin. If we think “It won’t do any good to talk this out with her, she won’t listen… or she’ll just throw it back in my face later”, we sin. When we feel superior to another person because “he’s so sinful”, we sin. When we attempt to see the sin in the heart of another person, we only pass judgment on ourselves; because that sin is in our own heart as well.

    Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. (Romans 2:1)

    Master, which is the great commandment in the law? 37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38This is the first and great commandment. 39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. (Matthew 22:36-40)

    The greatest command is to love God; completely, continuously, with every part of our heart, soul, and mind. When we fall short of this complete dedication, we sin. When we are distracted by this world and what is in it, we sin. When we take God for granted, we sin.

    How many ways can we break the commandment “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind”? Anytime we question his plan for us. Anytime we are not content with what he has given us. Anytime we are angry about what ‘life has dealt us’. Anytime we fail to give God the glory, the credit. Anytime we want control over our lives instead of searching out what God has prepared for us. Anytime we ‘rely on our own understanding’ instead of turning to God’s Word for our answers. Anytime when we are out in the world and we don’t stand up for God. Anytime we hide our faith. Anytime we don’t test the words of men by searching scriptures. Anytime we allow our feelings to sway us in a direction different from God’s revealed word. Ultimately, anytime we sin we rebel against God and break this command as well.

    When we cut a person off in traffic; rather than letting him in, we sin. When we fail to offer help to an ill neighbor, we sin. When we shun the people living around us, not wanting to be bothered by them, we sin. When we consider the command to “love our neighbor as ourselves” we must consider our sins of omission. The command is not “When you interact with your neighbor treat him with love”. The whole world is our neighbor. This command is broken many times by omission for every time by commission.

    He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (Matthew 19:18-19)

    Several commands are repeated from above. Additions are “do not steal”, “bear false witness”, and “honor your parents”. When we get ‘creative’ with our tax report, or bring the office’s supplies home to use, shave a little time off the clock by leaving early or taking long breaks, or don’t tell the clerk about an error in our favor, we commit the sin of stealing. We can steal not just money and valuables, but also time, privileges, and honor.

    When we talk a person down behind his back, when by our silence we fail to stick up for someone being ‘bad talked’, when we’d rather feel justified in our bitterness towards a person than admit our own complicity, we bear false witness and sin. When we pay a person false complements, exaggerate qualifications, or hide faults, resulting in a false representation of a person, we also commit this sin.

    “Honor your father and mother” is more than just a command for children to obey their parents until they become adults. When we fail to respect our parents, we sin. When we distance ourselves from our parents, ‘not listening’, we sin. When we hold resentments, we sin. If they have hurt us through their sinful actions and we fail to approach them with our pain and address the situation openly and in love, we sin. When we fail to forgive our parents, or hold them to unrealistic ideals, we sin. When we place ourselves above our parents, we sin.

    Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. (Ephesians 4:25)

    Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. (Ephesians 4:29)

    When we say something that is untrue, we sin. Even when we don’t actually say something, but by our silence create a false impression, we sin. Or, when we fail to state the truth when it is needed, we sin. When we tear someone down, rather than build that person up, we sin. When we hold back the truth because we fear it might make us unpopular or the other person “will take it the wrong way”, we sin. Our society has sayings like “white lies don’t hurt” and attitudes such as false humility, and ‘brown nosing’. These things are in fact lies, and sins.

    A lying tongue hateth those that are afflicted by it; and a flattering mouth worketh ruin. (Proverbs 26:28)

    Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good. 10Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another; 11Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord; 12Rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer; 13Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality. 14Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not. 15Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep. 16Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits. 17Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. 18If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. 19Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. 20Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. 21Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good. (Romans 12:9-21)

    A long list. When we consider ourselves better than another, we sin. Failing to return evil with love is sinful. When we shun people “of a lower class”, we sin. Again, actions alone do not satisfy these commands. Feeding our enemy while not wishing him well is still a sin.

    But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; 4Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks. 5For 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. (Ephesians 5:3-5)

    When we are not content with the things God has given us, and desire more, we sin. When we share a coarse joke, we sin. Any kind of impure or unclean thought, word, or deed is a sin.

    But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth. 9Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; (Colossians 3:8-9)

    Don’ts. Most of these have been covered already; but Paul makes the clear point that avoiding sins of commission is not ‘good enough’. He follows these don’ts with a list of Do’s.

    Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; 13Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye. 14And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness. (Colossians 3:12-14)

    When we don’t show kindness, we sin. Patience is said to be a virtue, but the absence of patience is a sin. When we withhold unconditional forgiveness from someone, we sin. This includes ourselves. That is, when we fail to forgive ourselves, we sin. These do’s are centered in the heart. No act is truly compassionate if compassion is not its motivation.

    The goal of God’s magnification of sin is to help mankind see their need for Christ not as their example and creditor, but as the provider of eternal life. They must give up on their own efforts to earn forgiveness, to become perfect, to progress in worthiness. Through witnessing God’s view of sin as revealed in the Holy Bible we can see our hopelessness so that we might gain sure hope in the Savior Jesus Christ by abandoning any hope in ourselves and fleeing to and trusting in Him!

  96. Charles D. said

    Good read!

  97. Charles,

    Why are you asking about my educational Background? Are you asking so that you can pick at me about it? As you can see I am unsure of your intent. Everytime I say something people tear it apart and splice and dice what I say.

    If you are truly NOT being disrespectful, as you say, then I will break it down for you, in hopes that I can trust you to be true and sincere.

    I’m a high school grad, With some college under my belt, but nothing significant. I had my daughter my senior year of highschool, even so I graduated with a 3.5, I worked and took care of her by myself. So there you have it. I’m not dumb, AND I have a lot of life experience. I’m curious to know WHY you ask.

    Also, I have a loving heart, I was blessed with this, I never claimed to be perfect! I’m far from perfect!!! But I do have a love for my Father in Heaven and a love for His children. When I look at people I see the good in them, I have compassion for them, I truly love them, my heart aches for those in pain. I have hope that people will hear the Lord and their hearts will be happy and whole.

    You quote scripture, and claim that everyone has an evil heart, well the scriptures tell us this…

    Luke 10: 27
    “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.”

    Eph. 3: 17
    “That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,”

    1 Tim. 1: 5
    “Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:”

    2 Tim. 2: 22
    “Flee also youthful lusts: but follow brighteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.”

    1 Pet. 1: 22
    “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned clove of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:”

    Matt. 5: 8
    “Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.”

  98. Charles D. said

    I did not ask out of disrespect, nor were my motives evil. My reasons has to do with the facts that each time you responded to a comment yesterday, you either disregarded what was said, always came back with this nice stuff that is tentamount to “works” which we both know or should know that works without faith is no good.

    I asked because I had no idea whether you understood what you had read in the Bible, or, if you were just fluffing it off; in which case I would have understood. Not agree, but I would have been left knowing. Things were said to you yesterday that were almost begging and pleading with you to make minimal effort to learn the truth, irrespective of your professed belief in a dieing cause.

    You said I impressed you with the idea that I thought everything was a conspricy. My thing is…I am exteremely careful about my intake of spiritual things. You should do the same. If you think God is some loving father, not capable of sending His created to hell; then believe me you have it wrong. He gave us free will and it is us who choose the path to hell.

    Last question: Would you rather your children love you or obey you? Thats simple enough, but I have to tell you, that I have discerned your response already, and you cannot have it both ways. Please tell me.

    Charles

  99. Charles,

    First, the conspiracy thing is NOT do to you being cautious regarding spiritual matters, it has to do with you thinking that I am somehow involved with people (karl and courtney for example) and that we have somehow devised a plan to attack this blog. Which is not the case at all. I come here alone. Me, myself and I, no one else. Which means NO conspiracy!

    Ok, next thing, It is NOT that I think God is incapable of sending people to hell, my belief is that He loves us so much He does not WANT to send us to hell for silly unimportant things. He is most certainly MORE then capable!

    And i’m sure you did guess it, I would rather my children love me. And you actually CAN have it both ways, because if your kids love you they WANT to obey you,(or at the very least TRY to obey you!)

  100. Karl said

    In our modern world, there are men who laugh at, scorn, question, milden, or openly deny the reality of hell. Some prefer to have a gentler less severe hell.

    And if thy hand scandalize thee, cut it off; it is better for thee to enter into life, maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into unquenchable fire; where their worm dies not, and the fire is not extinguished – Mark 9:42.

    Is this not a severe warning from God Himself? Those who are given to saying God is too merciful to send anyone to hell obviously do not have sufficient understanding of the reality and gravity of sin. They think that to sin against the all-powerful God is a matter of little consequence. Yet, in Matt 12:36 Christ Himself assures that we shall have to account even for every idle word that we simply say in passing without taking too much notice of it, as He searches the hearts of men and knows them for what they really are (Rev 2:23). Therefore, deluded folks like Steffielynn, and all those who ascribe to her poisonous beliefs saying, It is NOT that I think God is incapable of sending people to hell, my belief is that He loves us so much He does not WANT to send us to hell for silly unimportant things. He is most certainly MORE then capable! will wake up to the harsh reality of Hell when it is probably too late.

    God prepared hell not for man but for the devil and apostate angles, (Matthew 25: 41, Apoc 14:9). And it is for this reason that man is often given greater opportunities of repentance unlike the angels who sinned only once as unlike us their knowledge was perfect. However, hell is also the place where unrepentant sinners are sent (2 Thess 1:9). There, they will be in misery and torment (Daniel 12:2, Luke 13:24). Make no mistake, Hebrews 12:17 clearly warns, Those who enter Hell are to remain there forever, as they have nothing in common with God and have rejected him by their sins. Those who are dammed to hell are thus excluded from the presence of God (Galatians 5:21, Matthew 5:20,). Hell is a reward to the sins of men (Isiah 3:11/ 2 Romans 2:6), Just as heaven is the reward of those who live in Christ.

    Hell is a Kingdom for the dammed souls, were there is fire but in addition there is said to be ice, as we read in Job 24:19, Let him pass from the snow water to excessive heat, and his sin even to hell. The dammed in hell are tormented in many ways as forever will they have imprinted on their memories the results of their sins; forever will they repeat the words ascribed to them in the book of Wisdom : We have erred from the way of truth, we wearied ourselves in the way of iniquity and destruction and walked through hard ways. What hath pride profited us? .

    Compared to the eternal pains of Hell, the sufferings of this life are so light that they appear more imaginary than real. Add to these torments the undying worm which unceasingly gnaws the conscience of the sinner. For the condemned man in hell, his society will consist of demons of perversity and reprobate men. Consider also the confusion and darkness of this terrible abode, where there is no rest, no joy, no peace, no hope, but eternal rage and blasphemies, perpetual weeping and ceaseless gnashing of teeth.

    In Hell the damned are packed so tightly one on the other like bricks in a kiln. The fire is all-extensive and tortures the whole body and the whole soul. A damned person lies in hell forever in the same spot which he was assigned by divine justice, without being able to move, as a prisoner in stocks. The fire in which he is totally enveloped, as a fish in water, burns around him, on his left, his right, above and below (Mt 18:8). His head, his breast, his shoulders, his arms, his hands, and his feet are all penetrated with fire, so that he completely resembles a glowing hot piece of iron which has just been withdrawn from an oven. The roof beneath which the damned person dwells is fire; the food he takes is fire; the drink he tastes is fire; the air he breathes is fire; whatever he sees and touches is all fire (Mark 9:42).

    But this fire is not merely outside him; it also passes within the condemned person. It penetrates his brain, his teeth, his tongue, his throat, his liver, his lungs, his bowels, his belly his heart, his veins, his nerves, his bones, even to the marrow, and even his blood… A most terrible thing about hell is its duration (Mat 3:12) . The condemned person loses God and loses Him for all eternity. Now, what is eternity? Eternity never ends. This is the truth that has made even the great saints tremble. It is an essential misfortune of hell that everything will be without relief, without remedy, without interruption, without end, eternal.

    We are obsessed and blinded by the apparent goods of this earth, choose to live far from God and to turn their backs upon him. And should God wish to enter into their hearts by expelling sin from them, they seem not ashamed to repel him, exclaiming: Depart from us, we desire not the knowledge of they ways. (Job 21:14). The sinner thus says depart from us, we do not wish to follow your ways, but our own, our passions, our pleasures, our luxuries and fornications, and adulteries.

    True, God does not wish evil on anyone. He created all men for Heaven, and does not want anyone to go to Hell. His universal love and kindness offer everyone superabundant means for salvation. However when men refuse this kindness, preferring Hell over Heaven, they render it ineffectual. Furthermore, although God is good, He is also just. His kindness cannot contradict His justice. Among men, kindness can degenerate into weakness and justice into hardness of heart, but, being perfect, God’s virtues exist in an harmonic balance such that one cannot prevent the exercise of the other.

    God endowed angels and men with intelligence and will. Because the capacity to choose between good and evil is a characteristic of a rational being, God had to make every rational being free. This freedom differentiates us from irrational beings, who are uncontrollably guided by their instincts and thus unable to modify their actions. Since God cannot contradict His own work, He cannot create man free and then prevent him from using his freedom. Freedom is also necessary for actions to have merit. If God forced angels and men to do good, their actions would lack any merit.

    So, why did God create Hell? God created Hell to avenge the Divine justice offended by sin. Hell’s punishments atone for the offenses committed against Him and re-establish the order of the Universe, which demands that good is rewarded and evil castigated.

    Thus Hell’s existence is a powerful (and often the only effective) incentive for the practice of good. Fear of Hell has served to turn countless souls from the path of vice to love of God and virtue. Saint Augustine reputedly said that because of Original Sin, if Hell did not exist to punish evil, life on earth would be transformed into a Hell because without fear of future punishment, most men would selfishly seek their own advantage, and few would restrain their passions for the sake of love. Vice would reign everywhere. Imagine what life could be like if rapist, pedophiles, homosexuals, murderers, thieves were given free reign.

    Finally considering the mercy of God, Who grants so many graces for salvation, one sees more clearly the necessity of Divine Justice and Hell. God does not desire the perdition of the reprobates. When a person departs this life, as God’s enemy, persevering in evil and forever refusing the divine grace, their perdition comes from themselves, not God. Upon dying, the hardened sinner, sees God in His infinite perfection, and himself in the hideous moral condition in which he died simultaneously. The stainless Divine Purity contrasts with the reprobates moral ugliness to an unbearable degree. This contrast crushes him; making him feel repugnant in face of the infinite sanctity and perfection of God and the moral beauty of the elect, to such a degree that he prefers Hell’s torments to Heaven’s delights. Thus infinite beauty of God, that attracts him also repels him. Since God, the supreme Beauty for which man was made is unbearable to him, he detests, blasphemes and curses God, Whom he has lost forever. This can be compared to an obsessive relationship in which love, becoming impossible, is transformed into dominant, unsubdued hatred, heightened fury, rage and despair.

    In the writings of the early Christians we come to understand much, since they lived closer to the times of Christ and his apostles then we. With this in mind we look to them because contrary to what modern men who teach that truth is relative, Truth is eternal. It is the same, yesterday, today , and tomorrow. In the teachings of early Christians, we do not read about God being too merciful to send anyone to hell over what men call trivial matters. On the contrary they forcefully preached eternal damnation to those who live in sin. Here are a few examples.

    Theophilus of Antioch

    Give studious attention to the prophetic writings the Bible and they will lead you on a clearer path to escape the eternal punishments and to obtain the eternal good things of God.. God will examine everything and will judge justly, granting recompense to each according to merit. To those who seek immortality by the patient exercise of good works, he will give everlasting life, joy, peace, rest, and all good things.. For the unbelievers and for the contemptuous, and for those who do not submit to the truth but assent to iniquity, when they have been involved in adulteries, and fornications, and homosexualities, and avarice, and in lawless idolatries,there will be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish; and in the end, such men as these will be detained in everlasting fire (To Autolycus1:14 [A.D. 181].)

    Hippolytus

    Standing before Christ’s judgment, all of them, men, angels, and demons, crying out in one voice, shall say: ‘Just if your judgment!’ And the righteousness of that cry will be apparent in the recompense made to each. To those who have done well, everlasting enjoyment shall be given;while to the lovers of evil shall be given eternal punishment. The unquenchable and unending fire awaits these latter, and a certain fiery worm which does not die and which does not waste the body but continually bursts forth from the body with unceasing pain. No sleep will give them rest; no night will soothe them; no death will deliver them from punishment; no appeal of interceding friends will profit them (Against the Greeks 3 [A.D. 212]).

    Minucius Felix

    I am not ignorant of the fact that many, in the consciousness of what they deserve, would rather hope than actually believe that there is nothing for them after death. They would prefer to be annihilated rather than be restored for punishment. . . . Nor is there either measure nor end to these torments. That clever fire burns the limbs and restores them, wears them away and yet sustains them, just as fiery thunderbolts strike bodies but do not consume them (Octavius 34:12-5:3 [A.D. 226]).

    Cyprian of Carthage

    An ever-burning Gehenna and the punishment of being devoured by living flames will consume the condemned; nor will thee be any way in which the tormented can ever have respite or be at an end. Souls along with their bodies will be preserved for suffering in unlimited agonies. . . . The grief at punishment will then be without the fruit of repentance; weeping will be useless, and prayer ineffectual. Too late will they believe in eternal punishment, who would not believe in eternal life (To Demetrian24 [A.D. 252]).

    Oh, what a day that will be, and how great when it comes, dearest brethren!When the Lord … [will] cast into hell evildoers and will condemn our persecutors to the eternal fire and to punishing flame! (Letters 58:10[A.D. 253]).

    Lactantius

    Sacred writings inform us in what manner the wicked are to undergo punishment. For because they have committed sins in their bodies, they will again be clothed with flesh, that they may make atonement in their bodies; and yet it will not be that flesh with which God clothed man, like this our earthly body, but indestructible, and abiding for ever, that it may be able to hold out against tortures and everlasting fire, the nature of which is different from this fire of ours, which we use for the necessary purposes of life, and which is extinguished unless it be sustained by the fuel of some material. But that divine fire always lives by itself, and flourishes without any nourishment . . . The same divine fire, therefore,with one and the same force and power, will both burn the wicked and will form them again, and will replace as much as it shall consume of their bodies, and will supply itself with eternal nourishment . . . Thus, without any wasting of bodies, which regain their substance, it will only burn and affect them with a sense of pain. But when He shall have judged the righteous, He will also try them with fire (Divine Institutes 7:21 [A.D.307]).

    Cyril of Jerusalem

    We shall be raised therefore, all with our bodies eternal, but not all with bodies alike: for if a man is righteous, he will receive a heavenly body, that he may be able worthily to hold converse with Angels; but if a man is a sinner, he shall receive an eternal body, fitted to endure the penalties of sins, that he may burn eternally in fire, nor ever be consumed.And righteously will God assign this portion to either company; for we do nothing without the body. We blaspheme with the mouth, and with the mouth we pray. With the body we commit fornication, and with the body we keep chastity. With the hand we rob, and by the hand we bestow alms; and the rest in like manner. Since then the body has been our minister in all things, it shall also share with us in the future the fruits of the past(Catechetical Lectures 18:19 [A.D. 350]).

    Hell never has been denied by heretics, Jews or Mohammedan. The pagans themselves have retained their belief in it, although the errors of paganism may have impaired in their minds the sound notion. It has been reserved for modern and contemporaneous atheism, carried to the pitch of delirium, to outdo the impiety of all ages by denying the existence of hell.

    THE DENIAL OF HELL, OR ATTEMPTING TO MITIGATE IT IS FOOLISH BRAVADO.

  101. Charles D. said

    Steff; you said as captured in quotes below:

    “First, the conspiracy thing is NOT do to you being cautious regarding spiritual matters, it has to do with you thinking that I am somehow involved with people (karl and courtney for example) and that we have somehow devised a plan to attack this blog. Which is not the case at all. I come here alone. Me, myself and I, no one else. Which means NO conspiracy!”

    Okay, first of all, your beliefs are based on a false premise! Practically in all 3 paragraphs. I have no fear that you or any Mormon have or will come here to “attack” this site. For Christ’s sake Mormons come here trembling as it is now. Also, evil hates the light “light,” and Mormon are too busy trying to keep under wraps those parts of your beliefs that have not already been uncovered here.

    “Ok, next thing, It is NOT that I think God is incapable of sending people to hell, my belief is that He loves us so much He does not WANT to send us to hell for silly unimportant things. He is most certainly MORE then capable!”

    All of God’s “silly” and “unimportant things.” He left out of the Bible. If it’s in there (and what you’ve been told here,) is straight out of the Bible. One of the reasons I asked you about education also has to do with, both, others and myself telling you so many times, and now I will paraphrase: He does not want to send anyone He created to Hell, but, that they come to know and accept (not believe in, not accept Christ as a prophet on line with and certainly not subordinate to a Joseph Smith or anyone else), but totally accept Christ as their personal savior, otherwise, their decision not to do so, is a decision to choose hell by default. Period! All of the talking, sweetness in the world CANNOT change that. You “works” are a foul smelling savor in the nostrils of God. The below response to your answer to my question applies equally.

    “And i’m sure you did guess it, I would rather my children love me. And you actually CAN have it both ways, because if your kids love you they WANT to obey you,(or at the very least TRY to obey you!)”

    Sure I guessed it, but, I was pulling for you to say obey you. As the parent, you are not going to tell or otherwise give your children anything that will harm them. If you love your children, you would much perfer them to be SAFE and SECURE, even if it pains you. That is true love of a protective parent. Rather than this feel good “they love me” feeling. They will love you when you tell them right things and respect you as well. Them loving you is for your benefit; whereas you loving them is your gift to them, and your first and highest parential duty. AND, if they don’t love you back, your love for them becomes a self-sacrificial love approaching agape, but, not there yet.

    It is much like our heavenly Father loves us, His children. He is well aware of the fact that everything He tells is not going to be either pleasing or pleasant to us. However, He sees things and know things that we don’t and we may never know. He knows our construct and everything there is to know about us and about His roral creation (which is everything). He knows (and you will come to know as well). Although you don’t know why He does some of the things He require of us, if we obey Him in Spirit and in Truth, we will come to know during the course of our relationship with Him.

    Finally, and the Bible says: Obedience is better than sacrifice.

    Charles

    P.S. I hope you that this to heart and see I didn’t even rag on you about the multiphasic personalities, i.e., “me, myself and I”

  102. Charles,

    So now I am completely confused.

    1st.

    The silly and unimportant things, are for example, the “trinity”. This is something you believe in and I don’t, and you believe I will go to hell for NOT believing in this “trinity”. AND the “trinity” is NOT biblical!!!!!

    Also I believe in Jesus Christ, as my Savior, and I certainly do NOT think He is “subordinate to a Joseph Smith”.

    Charles, I don’t understand how you can get all high and mighty and sentence someone to hell, because YOU disagree, but then you use the Lord’s name in vain! This reminds me of the scripture,
    John 8:7
    “So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”

    Also I don’t understand why people insist we LDS believe we will “earn” our way to heaven, and then tell me that you MUST obey. Isn’t obeying a “work”????

    And finally, this love and obey analogy. I believe if you love you will obey, and you believe if you obey you love, but the scriptures say this..

    1 Corinthians 13:1-13
    “Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
    2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
    3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
    4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity denvieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
    5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
    6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
    7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
    8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
    9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
    10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
    11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
    12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
    13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.”

    Charles what is Charity? Charity is pure LOVE.

    My hope for you is that you will see that I believe in my Savior, and that I love Him and my Father in Heaven with ALL my heart!!!

  103. Charles D. said

    “Charles, I don’t understand how you can get all high and mighty and sentence someone to hell, because YOU disagree, but then you use the Lord’s name in vain! This reminds me of the scripture,”

    Point out to me even ONE instance where I used the Lord’s name in vain? That tells me that you might have read a page or two of the Bible, but, assuredly, you NEVER studied the Bible. If you had, even if you never saw “Trinty” in the Bible, the Trinity would be in your knowledge base.

    “Also I believe in Jesus Christ, as my Savior, and I certainly do NOT think He is “subordinate to a Joseph Smith”.”

    Next, you have to believe Jesus Christ IS your Savior, but even more important, He really has to be. As long as you do not cringe to mention Smith in the same sentence as Christ; you don’t get it yet.

    ” Charles, I don’t understand how you can get all high and mighty and sentence someone to hell, because YOU disagree, but then you use the Lord’s name in vain! This reminds me of the scripture,..”

    Again, given the “understanding” that you have exhibited in these pages, I don’t even know what you mean by “high” and “mighty” but far be it from me to even wish I were either. If you think so, then, that would be in line with your analysis of more crucial Bible teachings. Doesn’t bother me though, because in the very next sentence you attempt to use the circular defense that IC has pointed out and I affirm. You lay claim to my words to you for your defense, i.e.,”sentence someone to hell, because YOU disagree.” take a look at my comments at 1st para #58, then 1st para #73. In deed you would have been more original had you said “send to hell” or “cast into” or even destined for,” however, when you lift words, you lift them absolutely.

    Regarding your wish for me to know: what I DO know that if you are, or, make it into the Lambs book, you WILL come to know a real and trusting relationship with Christ and Him only. Absent that, God gave you free moral agency to make the decisions that you make. Neither IC, Job, Eden or myself can take that freedom away from you. You can even choose hell if you are so inclined; and thus far you have chosen that for your eternal future. And, while you say you believe in Christ, that you love God (that’s two of the three by the way), you did not mention that the Holy Spirit in dwell, to your credit; however true, but sad, nonetheless.

    Oh! almost forgot; yes charity is love, one of a multiplicity of it’s meaning. Yes, in the Bible. I have charity for you as is my “reasonable service” has Christ has charged me. Be well.

    Charles

  104. Charles,

    Comment #101

    “For Christ’s sake”

    AND… I have not choosen Hell, I have choosen My Heavenly Father, who knows me and loves me, whom I know and love, and who is the only one that can tell me where my place will be!

  105. Charles D. said

    Okay, what you are trying to do now is make me the “heavy” by implying that I asked about your educational background only to make you appear stupid. Well, I’ve issued sufficient caveats, I’ve given you my reason for asking in the first place; now, it is you that is doing your best imitation of stupid personified.

    You say I took the Lord’s name in vain by quoting only part of the sentence that I will paste below. But not before saying that in 4th grade or earlier students learn that it takes at least a complete sentence to make a complete thought, idea, etc.

    “For Christ’s sake Mormons come here trembling as it is now.”

    Okay smarty pants, a scholar could make the case that my sentence actually pays homeage, as in: because Christ is so Mighty (whihc I unabashedly believe), that Mormans from Joseph Smith, both, Sr. & Jr. come to where He is dicussed in fear and trepedation. Is that in vain? Maybe only to a half-baked Mormasn that haven’t a clue as to what my God and my Savior is all about, which further demonstrate that your cult is forever lost.

    However, to further mystify Mormons eveil noodles; I take the full responsibility for have done exactly what you have accused me of; SO WHAT? Don’t you little girl know that I have liberty in the Lord. And if I did what you accused me of it have no impact whatsoever on my eternal security? It, first of all, is not a sin unto death. Secondly, it is you that will have to account for that accusation. You have enough trouble to deal with already! Did it take you all day and most of the night to come up with that?????

    Bring on the Mormons, all of them, if they are advising you, or is no brighter than you are, then, I, no not I but the Spirit within me will deal with you.

    If it is not apparent what your next action should be, then, I feel so sorry for you, your husband, your children, and your family.

    May it be so,

    Charles

  106. Karl said

    I want to understand why protestants are stuck to the belief that if something is not mentioned in the bible then it cannot be true. Why?

  107. Eden Hadassah said

    Karl,
    When something is not in the bible, it leads to “other” theologies about God that simply may not be true and the end result would be not worshipping the Lord in spirit and in truth. When this happens, and people begin to believe things not written in the bible, they also fall into idolatry. Idolatry is worshipping something that is not God.

  108. Charles D. said

    Karl;

    First of a, I have no idea what you are talking about, or to whom you are speaking. By chance you are making reference you are addressing something I said, then, give me an example and I will surely speak to it, directly,

    I will, however, throw this out there and it may negate your further bewonderment. You have to understand that in there time, God set into motion, three very amazing laws from which everything sprang; e.g., His Spiritual law or principle, His physical/natural laws/principles, and His eternal law/principles, among others.

    So, Karl, what are you making reference to that do not spring from one of those?

    Charles

  109. Charles D. said

    Okay, [alphabets included], your turn 🙂 speak to you from the office, I’m late

    Chaz

  110. So you take responsibility, but then excuse yourself because that commandment was not meant for YOU because YOU have “liberty in the Lord”?!?

    Interesting, I’m wondering where in the bible it states this????

    I’m not trying to get you all riled up Charles, I’m pointing these things out to you so that you may possibly see that what you are saying about mormons is judgemental and flat out wrong.

    Your eternal destiny AND mine will be determined by God. Not by you and not by me.

    There is but ONE Judge!

    James 4:11-12

    “Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.
    12 There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?”

    Charles I hope and pray that you will see me as a child of God, Not an “evil Mormon”. Again, I love my Savior Jesus Christ, and I live my life for my Father in Heaven.

  111. Karl said

    Eden,

    if i have understood you correctly, you are saying that the bible alone is sufficient and, therefore, the sole authority in determining Christian doctrine?

  112. Eden Hadassah said

    It is Christ and him crucified, this is the sole authority of determining Christian doctrine… his coming in the flesh, living a sinless life, freely giving his life for my sins and yours, being crucified, buried and resurrected from the dead, this is Christian doctrine at it’s finest. The Good News that we may have eternal life.
    It is also important to realize that he did rise from the dead by the power of the Holy Spirit and that he sits at the right hand of the Father. He ascended into heaven in full view of men.
    There are doctrines that teach that Jesus didn’t actually rise from the dead, just as there are doctrines that allow necromancy or speaking to the dead…such as the case with those who pray to Mary. Mary did not ascend, nor did she live a sinless life and she is not a perpetual virgin. She was not the immaculate conception. How many people have believed such theologies, and fallen into idolatry and necromancy? Praying to saints and looking with breathless adoration at the statue of the Mary? It is contrary to the word of God.
    The same goes for those who do not believe that Christ rose from the dead, but just think “he is.” That he is a “spirit body,” when the scriptures clearly state otherwise.
    It leads to improper beliefs and in the end denies the gospel.

  113. Karl said

    You have not answered my question my question.

    Again I ask you, whom should mankind look up to as the guiding authority, as far as interpretation of Scripture is concerned? Surely we are all not all intelligent, or may not even be literate at all. Therefore we are capable of erring in our interpretation of Scripture, if we attempt to rely solely on ourselves.

  114. Eden Hadassah said

    The Holy Spirit. Simple. Isn’t the scriptures easy enough to understand? Why interpret what is plainly written?

  115. Job said

    steffielynn:

    So how are the squishy evangelicals on http://ldstalk.wordpress.com treating you these days? They don’t seem to like me very much over there 🙂

  116. Job,
    I’m so busy commenting on your blog 🙂 I really have not been over there for months. Although, since you left a link I did go read some of their posts and comments. I find that blog very interesting, I think they have some really good discussions. And i’m sure they like you, they just have a very different approach. 🙂

  117. Karl said

    Eden,

    2 Pet 1:20, clearly teaches, This then you must understand first of all, that NO PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURE IS MADE BY PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. And why?

    The answer is to be found in 2 Pet 3:16-17> where he says, …In these Epistles there are certain things difficult to understand, WHICH THE UNLEARNED AND UNSTABLE DISTORT, JUST AS THEY DO THE REST OF THE SCRIPTURES ALSO, TO THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION. YOU THEREFORE, BRETHREN, SINCE YOU KNOW THIS BEFOREHAND, BE ON YOUR GUARD LEST, CARRIED AWAY BY THE ERROR OF THE FOOLISH, YOU FALL AWAY FROM YOUR STEADFASTNESS.

    How about Acts 8:27-40, where the eunuch trying to read Isaiah, was asked by, Do you understand what you are reading? But he said, Why, how can I, unless someone SHOWS ME?

    Are these not very clear and strong warnings that it is easy to fall into error by private interpretation of Scripture? Peter couldn’t have been more plain. It is crystal clear that we are NOT to interpret scripture on our own. How is it that an intelligent man of the 21 century like you, Eden, find it difficult to understand plain language?

    Furthermore, from you assertion, one can safely conclude that the Holy Spirit is responsible for the opposing viewpoints preached by the thousands of mutually hostile protestants sects, and individuals each believing he/she is inspired by the Holy Spirit right right?. Now, if Truth is one and The Holy Spirit teaches this one Truth,

    1. How can the Holy Spirit tell the Lutherans the Eucharist is the true presence of Christ, and then tell the Baptists it is only a symbol?

    2. How can the Holy Spirit tell the Methodists it is alright to have female ministers, and then tell the Baptists it is unbiblical?

    3. How can the Holy Spirit tell the Seventh Day Adventists that Saturday is the day of worship, and then tell the Presbyterians the day of worship is Sunday and not Saturday?

    4. How can the Holy Spirit tell the Lutherans that the Blessed Virgin Mary was and remains always virgin, and then tell the Baptists she had other children?

    5. How can the Holy Spirit tell the Baptists, ‘once saved always saved’, and then tell the Church of Christ that Sola Fides is unscriptural?

    6. How can the Holy Spirit tell Episcopalians to baptize infants and then tell Pentecostals infant baptism is invalid?

    7. How can the Holy Spirit tell Mormons that the Holy Trinity is three separate persons, and then tell Methodists the Trinity is three persons in one GOD?

    One could go on and on, but I think you get the point. It takes only a minimum of common sense to realize that the Holy Spirit could not be speaking to each and everyone of those thousands of non-Catholic sects in the opposing ways. In view of the above, one wonders if the Holy Spirit could possibly be the author of confusion?

    Further explain to me how your assertion that “scripture alone is sufficient” could possibly hold in the times before the printing press was invented. Before that time it took one monk up to 20 years of his labor to hand copy one Bible. The cost of a bible was prohibitive and all of the population was illiterate and could not have been able to read a Bible even if it were available en mass, then please tell me how it could possibly work?

    If scripture is easy enough to understand, and easily interpreted, and if the Holy Spirit leads every Christian to interpret it infallibly, then why are there over 34000+ protestant denominations in existence today, with millions of individuals all interpreting the Bible differently?

  118. Job said

    Karl:

    “If scripture is easy enough to understand, and easily interpreted, and if the Holy Spirit leads every Christian to interpret it infallibly, then why are there over 34000+ protestant denominations in existence today, with millions of individuals all interpreting the Bible differently?”

    The problem is usually not that scripture is interpreted differently. The problem is that people have rebellious hearts that cause them to reject what the Bible says and follows after movements that accommodate them.

    1. Lutherans believe this because Lutherans adhere to Roman Catholic doctrine instead of the Bible in this matter. Incidentally, plenty of Roman Catholics reject transubstantiation, always have (check the history of your church), and choose to remain Roman Catholics in spite of it.

    2. Because Methodists reject the Bible for feminism. Incidentally, plenty of Roman Catholics believe that there should be female priests and that priests and nuns should be allowed to marry, and remain Roman Catholics in spite of church traditions.

    3. The Bible clearly says and church history bears witness that the Sabbath is from sundown Friday until sundown Saturday, and that the early church met on the first day of the week to have communion. The Bible also clearly says that Gentile Christians are not bound by the Sabbath. Any confusion results from improperly referring to the Lord’s Day as the Sabbath, or claiming that the Lord’s Day is the true Sabbath. The Sabbath and the Lord’s Day are two different days that serve two different purposes. There really should be no contention over this at all, because A) the Bible specifically says NOT to argue over it and B) the Bible does not tell the church which day they CAN or CANNOT meet for communion. People refuse to recognize this simple fact because they place man’s doctrines over what the Bible says.

    4. This is another instance over choosing Roman Catholic doctrine over the Bible’s clearly stating that Joseph and Mary consummated their marriage. The notion that Mary would have been “defiled” by having sex with her husband does not even come from Christianity. Roman Catholic teaching not only violates Matthew 1:25 and other verses that refers to the brothers of Jesus Christ, but also where Paul commands married couples not to defraud one another. According to Jewish law, never consummating a marriage violates the marriage contract, and they cannot even continue to live with each other. And while Roman Catholics have built up loads of doctrine concerning “Virgin Mary”, what spiritual or doctrinal significance is there for “Virgin Joseph”? Where in scripture was Joseph called to live a life of celibacy? If there was a “Joseph exception” that freed him from the teachings of Paul on this matter, it would have been given just as Jesus Christ nullified the teachings of Judaism on divorce. And those who claim that Jesus Christ could not have been borne by a sinful womb (another issue I agree) what of John the Baptist being filled with the Holy Spirit in vitro? So … Elizabeth could carry a child indwelled with the third Person of the Trinity but Mary could not carry the Second Person incarnate? Don’t you realize that such is subordination, long ago rejected as heresy by the ecumenical councils? Apparently you do not.

    5. Well, Calvinist Baptists agree with Augustine, whom your own church has venerated to sainthood. Meanwhile, your Roman Catholic Church agrees with Pelagius, whom your own church calls a heretic. Roman Catholics have far more to answer for on this matter than do free will Protestants.

    6. Episcopalians reject the Bible for Roman Catholicism on this point.

    7. Mormons are not Christians. Of course, your inclusion of them shows your disdain for Protestants by claiming that by our mutual rejection of the authority of the Bishop of Rome, there is no difference between Mormons and Protestants. (Do you say the same for the Orthodox churches? Of course you do not.) As a matter of fact, I am discovering in this election season that Roman Catholics actually prefer Mormons to Protestants because while you are closer to us doctrinally, they are closer to you in mindset in their elevating a church and tradition over the Bible, and also having centralized human authority that claims to be God’s representative on earth. (Jews prefer Mormons to Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox for other reasons). That is why so many Roman Catholics are demanding that we evangelicals and fundamentalists vote for Mitt Romney or else, just so it can be made known to us that we are all equal in Rome’s eyes.

    Dear Karl, please understand that I am very sympathetic to your main thesis that history and current events prove that not everyone who calls himself a Christian has the ability or right to interpret the Bible. However, you must admit that the same history and current events demonstrate that the Roman Catholic Church cannot and should not insist upon the authority of its tradition because Roman Catholic tradition is ever changing. As a matter of fact, such doctrines as the immaculate conception and the infallibility of the pope were made official quite recently after having been bitterly opposed by huge numbers of Roman Catholics throughout history.

    But sola scriptura Christianity, well we have the benefit of saying that though that interpretations among individuals may differ (just as the interpretation of how to treat Gentile Christians differed between Peter and Paul, and please note that it was the position of Peter, a Jew zealous for the law that you claim to be the first pope of a church that demonized and persecuted Jews for almost 2000 years and who received absolute authority from Jesus Christ, who was declared to be wrong by scripture), the integrity of the Bible itself stands.

    Look, your own church doctrine teaches that the anti – Christ will be an invalidly selected pope. Consider the implications of that doctrine: it makes both the pope and the Roman Catholic Church fallible. Again, both of those facts are well known to history, especially during the dark period of your institution’s history when several popes were murdered by their successors. One pope came to the throne by strangling his predecessor with his own hands, the other chose the more detached and cruel method of starving his predecessor to death in a dungeon. With these and many other bad facts at our disposal, sola scriptura Christians would rather put our trust in the Bible than in some human institution that did not even exist until hundreds of years after the canon was completed, and owed its true founding to political, military, and economic crises caused by Rome and the rest of the western part of the Roman Empire being beseiged and overrun by barbarians.

  119. Eden Hadassah said

    It is written on the heart as well.
    It is the teachings of men that you are refering to, and NOT the Holy Scriptures. And since you were so apt to bring up 2 Peter 1:20, lets look again at the scripture in CONTEXT so that you may see clearly that you have chosen to take a scripture out of context in an effort to create NEW interpretations:

    1 Peter 1:12-2:1-3
    So I will always remind you of these things, even though you know them and are firmly established in the truth you now have. I think it is right to refreash your memory as long as I live in the tent of this body, because I know that I will soon put it aside, as our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me. And I will make every effort to see that after my departure you will always be able to remember these things.
    We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his mafesty. For he received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.
    AND WE HAVE THE WORD OF THE PROPHETS MADE MORE CERTAIN, AND YOU WILL DO WELL TO PAY ATTENTION TO IT, AS TO A LIGHT SHINING IN A DARK PLACE, UNTIL THE DAY DAWNS AND THE MORNING STAR RISES IN YOUR HEARTS. ABOVE ALL, YOU MUST UNDERSTAND THAT NO PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURE CAME ABOUT BY THE PROPHET’S OWN INTERPRETATION. FOR PROPHECY NEVER HAD ITS ORIGIN IN THE WILL OF MAN, BUT MEN SPOKE FROM GOD AS THEY WERE CARRIED ALONG BY THE HOLY SPIRIT.
    But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there WILL BE FALSE TEACHERS AMONG YOU. THEY WILL SECRETLY INTRODUCE DESTRUCTIVE HERESIES, EVEN DENYING THE SOVEREIGN LORD WHO BOUGHT THEM-BRINGING SWIFT DESTRUCTION ON THEMSELVES. mANY WILL FOLLOW THEIR SHAMEFUL WAYS AND WILL BRING THE WAY OF TRUTH INTO DISREPUTE. iN THEIR GREED THESE TEACHERS WILL EXPLOIT YOU WITH STORIES THEY HAVE MADE UP. tHEIR COMDEMNATION HAS LONG BEEN HANGING OVER THEM, AND THEIR DESTRUCTION HAS NOT BEEN SLEEPING.”

    Now…this is what you said:
    “2 Pet 1:20, clearly teaches, This then you must understand first of all, that NO PROPHECY OF SCRIPTURE IS MADE BY PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. And why?”

    Didn’t you read in context? How obsurd to try to reference it with 2 Peter 3:16-17! You sir have twisted scripture, AND I believe 2 Peter 3:16-17 references you perfectly.

    Here are your words concerning such things:

    “The answer is to be found in 2 Pet 3:16-17> where he says, …In these Epistles there are certain things difficult to understand, WHICH THE UNLEARNED AND UNSTABLE DISTORT, JUST AS THEY DO THE REST OF THE SCRIPTURES ALSO, TO THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION. YOU THEREFORE, BRETHREN, SINCE YOU KNOW THIS BEFOREHAND, BE ON YOUR GUARD LEST, CARRIED AWAY BY THE ERROR OF THE FOOLISH, YOU FALL AWAY FROM YOUR STEADFASTNESS.”

    Now let me quote it in context:
    2 Peter 3:15-18
    “Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, WHICH IGNORANT AND UNSTABLE PEOPLE DISTORT, AS THEY DO THE OTHER SCRIPTURES, TO THEIR OWN DESTRUCTION. tHEREFORE, DEAR FRIENDS, SINCE YOU ALREADY KNOW THIS, BE ON YOUR GUARD SO THAT YOU MAY NOT BE CARRIED AWAY BY THE ERROR OF LAWLESS MEN AND FALL FROM YOUR SECURE POSITION. BUT GROW IN THE GRACE AND KNOWLEDGE OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST. TO HIM BE GLORY BOTH NOW AND FOREVER! AMEN.”

    I don’t know what version of scripture you read, but I think that a few things got left out of verse 17 in your quoting.

    As far as your reference to the book of Acts, if you recall, the Ethiopian was reading from the book of Isaiah, and the Lord sent Philip to him concerning the prophecy. And Philip proclaimed the Good News about Jesus Christ.

    And since you like to harp on protestant sects, lets talk about all your “holy popes.” How many interpretation did they give?
    How many? They contridict each other and were rotten to the core. Much the same as many protestant preachers today. I have absolutely no problem saying that. It is the truth. Your popes were corrupt to the core, and disobeyed scripture so much so that it no longer even resembles the Gospel of Christ.
    Luther was the one to actually make it possible for the common person to read the scriptures. So, for some 1500 years your blasphemous popes did not spread the gospel, but spread the church. Was it not a crime for the average person to even read the sacred text? And to have all the “Masses” spoken in Latin? What a crime.
    What is wrong with you? You want us to be a part of that? To deny our Lord, for whom our redemption sealed? For his mother? No way sir.

  120. johnkaniecki said

    Eden,

    Hello it is nice to see you are still contending for the faith.

    Karl if it’s from God it has to be pure and perfect. You believe that the pope speaks as the Vicar of Christ. One with such qualifications must act like Christ has done. Unfortunately the history of your organization is so tainted with evil that it is even in the running. The fact that none of these things have been “repented of” makes it all the more diabolical. Get real!

    You can talk about your great church leaders and what they had to say. My question is how do they compare to Jesus. Yes the sad facta is that we all fall short of the glory of God. Yet when anyone advocates heinous evils in the name of God they are of the spirit of the anti Christ whether they wear the title of Pope or peasant.

    Love,

    John

    IC, Yes I feel I must come back to this point once again. Karl knows the reality of his church’s deed. I challenge him to answer for these deeds.

    There is only one head to the Church and that is Jesus.

  121. John, have at him my brother.

    This whole comment thread has become like when someone puts a couple of dead batteries in the freezer overnight, hoping they’ll work well all day tomorrow. They never work as hoped, but someone keeps sticking those two dead power cells back in the freezer hoping they charge up.

    Fran’s reminder to resist the devil and he will flee comes to mind again.

    The apostates who continue here won’t come to their senses unless God alone grants them repentance.

    Sometimes you’ve got to trash dead batteries and if they ever attain life they’ll shine a light later. But at the moment, they’re dead and when a battery tester (rightly divided scripture) is placed on them nothing registers at all.

    I think some just come here for the sake of attention.

  122. Fran said

    IC,

    It sounds like rehash hash. I read, but I don’t comment much. Once scripture is used for correction, why go any further. Christians need to remember that they don’t war against flesh and blood, so see who is really behind the scenes operating in those that alow themselves to be used of the adversary. It’s not the person, it’s a spirit. They are on their job, and we need to be on ours. Rebuke it, with the word, and move on.

  123. Charles said

    “Stefflynn says:
    1. So you take responsibility, but then excuse yourself because that commandment was not meant for YOU because YOU have “liberty in the Lord”?!?
    Interesting, I’m wondering where in the bible it states this????
    Charles I hope and pray that you will see me as a child of God, Not an “evil Mormon”. Again, I love my Savior Jesus Christ, and I live my life for my Father in Heaven.”

    The above are your words and your question. My answer is: “All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power2of any. (1 Cor. 6:12)”

    Unlike previous time – I do not intend to let you mince words or side-step the issue at hand as Mormons are traditionally known to do. Either you did not know, you thought that I did not know, or you are full of it and could care less about your eternal destiny.

    YOU (in particular) have neither the ability or spiritual authority to speak to MY eternal destiny, so, please refrains from coupling me as a co-laborer in Christ because you’re not. And, in so far as “Charles I hope and pray that you will see me as a child of God, Not an “evil Mormon”. “Evil Mormon” are your words not mine; in spite of the truth contained therein.

    Again you said: “I love my Savior Jesus Christ” remember: “if you love me you will keep my commandments” and, “I live my life for my Father in Heaven.” You may think you do (and I doubt that, seriously), you will never, ever achieve “God-like,” so why don’t you try for “Christ-like,” but I tell you this truth, you cannot live to become more “Mormon-like” and realize either the Father or Christ.

    Repent now,

    Charles

  124. Diane said

    Hello Steffielynn,

    I tried to leave a comment at your website but had trouble logging in, and also, do you have an e-mail address? And yes, I agree there are no small miracles 🙂 !

  125. steffielynn said

    Charles,

    In comment #105 you said

    “However, to further mystify Mormons eveil noodles; I take the full responsibility for have done exactly what you have accused me of”

    Maybe I did not understand correctly, but I think it was YOU who called Mormons evil, so YOUR words, NOT mine.

    Why is it you constantly pick at my comments unjustly and then I point something out to you, and you get freaked out?

    You question my intelligence, and promise it is not out of disrepect, and then you call me stupid, (comment #105) and then basically call all Mormons stupid (again read comment #105) And in the same comment that you question my intelligence, you misspell half your words.

    All I’m saying Charles is that when you become perfect, you can challenge my intelligence and sincerity, until then you should seriously do some real soul searching. A flawed imperfect person cannot judge, no matter how high you think you are on the Christian totem pole.

    What are we even going back and forth about? I don’t even know what points you are trying to make anymore.

    So if you want to continue to challenge me I “dare” you to come to my blog so we can quit jacking Job’s thread.

    (i’m kidding about the whole dare thing, but you really can come to my blog and question me all day long. I will NOT skirt issues or questions. We can start with one question, and I promise to answer the best I can, and there are a whole lot of LDS there that know a lot more then I do.)

  126. Diane

    I’m sorry you are having troubles getting on my blog 😦

    I don’t want to post my email here, but I will give you the link to where it is on my blog, http://mormonsrock.wordpress.com/2007/12/22/merry-christmas-i-hope-so/

    I look forward to hearing from you! 🙂

    Steffielynn

  127. Charles D. said

    “Maybe I did not understand correctly, but I think it was YOU who called Mormons evil, so YOUR words, NOT mine”

    No! I was actually quoting YOU when I said “evil” in my #123; but thats a mute point because I have said it so many times I forget. AND! I guess I will continue to say it until you guys do something about the hellward situation that LDS in it’s entirety find itself.

    Regarding the attacks on your intelligence, those too, are your words. As I understand it we are suppose to be discussing the “all things are legal to me” unless you skip that one too. You said it did not exist in the Bible, or, point it out to you: then, I did and now you fail to mention it. Why is that?

    I would come to your blog but I’m not sure if I’m a diabetic and all of that sweetness might schock my system. Also, you know very well that I’ve seen your site and the very first thing you would have to do it get rid of that gosh-awful “slimy green” colored border. Then too, I know for sure I’m a Christian, so what could we discuss there that we cannot discuss here? You say there are a lot of LDS there that know more than you. However, there would be little if any difference because the commonality is what they do not know; that they do not know Christ, and Him crucified. But thanks for the invite.

    Finally, the reason I remain self confident when I make a typo or even misspell a word here or there is because I have certificates that says I have waited my term in institutions of higher learning, whereas your institutions, (being kind), just different.

    Whats legal for you under LDS?

    Charles

  128. Karl said

    Eden,

    it is nigh impossible, and almost pointless, to hold a sane discussion of scripture with protestants because ALL their bibles, including King James Bible, are mutilated or corrupted, thanks to the “reformers”. So, it is pretty obvious that we are not talking the same verses because we are not using the same reference Bible. I have even been accused of carrying out a hatchet job on Bible verses used in my arguments. Why would I? I exclusively quote, verbatim, the Douay Rheims Bible which is based on the Latin Vulgate, painstakingly put together by the illustrious Church Doctor, St Jerome. You on the other hand are probably using the King James Bible or one of the mutilated protestant bibles handed down to you by the so-called reformers. So we are probably going to be contending about which bible is correct. In any case, here are the facts about the protestant bible.

    Open any Protestant Bible side by side with the Douay Rheims Bible and you will find that there are seven Books missing in the former, namely, Tobias, Baruch, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, 1 Machabees, 2 Machabees, seven chapters of the Book of Esther and 66 verses of the 3rd chapter of Daniel, commonly called The Canticle of the Three Children, (Daniel iii., 24-90, Douai version). These books were deliberately removed by Luther, Calvin, and Zwinglius, so called reformers.

    The criticisms and remarks of these Sons of Satan concerning these seven books of the Old Testament show to what depths of impiety those unhappy men had allowed themselves to fall when they broke away from the Catholic Church. Even in regard to the New Testament it required all the powers of resistance on the part of the more con­servative Reformers to prevent Luther from throwing out the Epistle of St. James as unworthy to remain within the volume of Holy Scripture, an Epistle of straw, with no character of the Gospel in it. He also dishonored the Epistle of St Jude, the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the beautiful Apocalypse of St. John, claiming they were not on the same footing as the rest of the books, and did not contain the same amount of Gospel (i.e. his Gospel). The presumptuous way in which Luther, among others, poured contempt, and doubt upon some of the inspired writings which had been acknowledged, cherished, and venerated for hundreds of years would be scarcely credible were it not that we have his very words in cold print, which cannot lie, and may be read in his Biography, or be seen quoted in such books as Dr. Westcott’s The Bible in The Church.

    Why did Luther cut out these books? Because they did not fit his new doctrines and opinions. He preached the principle of private interpretation of Scripture, whereby one picks and chooses religious doctrines. So any book, like the Book of Machabees, that taught a doctrine that contradicted his doctrines was removed. This then was the fate of Machabees which taught, in 2 Mach. xii.46, it is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from sins. This verse contradicted Luther’s doctrine that Purgatory is a fable. Therefore, the book was removed. This is how the reformers mutilated whole books and/or verses of the Bible.

    It was the same with passages and texts in those books which Luther allowed to remain, and pronounced to be worthy to find a place within the new Reformed Bible. In short, he not only cast out certain books, but he mutilated some that were left. For example, not pleased with St Paul’s doctrine, ‘we are justified by faith’, and fearing lest good works (a Popish superstition) might creep in, he added the word ‘only’ after St Paul’s words, altering the sentence to: ‘We are justified by Faith only’, and so it remained in all Protestant Bibles to this day.

    An action such as that must surely be reprobated by anyone who claims to be a bible Christian. What is shocking, is the audacity of the man that coolly changed by a stroke of the pen a fundamental doctrine of the Apostle of God, St. Paul, who wrote, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. But this was the outcome of the Protestant standpoint, individual judgment: no authority outside of oneself. However ignorant, however stupid, however unlettered, you may, cut and carve out a Bible and a Religion for yourself. No Pope, no Council, no Church shall enlighten you or dictate or hand down the doctrines of Christ. Thee result we have seen is the corruption of God’s Holy Word.

    In spite of reviling of the Roman Church, the Reformers were forced to accept from her those Sacred Scriptures which they retained in their collection. Whatever Bible they have today, disfigured as it is, was taken from Catholics. Blind indeed must be the evangelical Christian who cannot recognize in the Catholic Bible the quarry from which he has hewn the Testament he loves and studies. That the Reformers appropriated the Bible of the Catholic Church (which was the only volume of God’s Scripture ever known on earth), even for the purpose of elevating it into a false position, could be understandable. What is staggering, is their deliberate exclusion from that Sacred Volume of some of the inspired Books which had God for their Author, and the deliberate alteration of some of the texts of those books that were suffered to remain.

    It is on consideration of such points as these that pious persons outside the Catholic fold would do well to remember the terrible warning, recorded by St John, concerning what God will send upon those who shall take away from the words of the Book of Life? Does he not say in Apoc. xxii. 19,

    And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things that are written in this book. Apoc. xxii. 19)

    How is it that protestants blindly follow the enemies of God and do not seem to even lose any sleep over it?

    In my next posting we shall look at King James I, author and prime mover of the most common bible, The King James Bible.

  129. Charles said

    What a load of hooey. Karl’s comments were directed to Eden, however, I’m taking liberty here because his diatribe included all Protestants.

    Eden can take this girly-man before breakfast; therefore, she doesn’t need me helping her with light work. I can hear her now saying: “Babylon is a whore, of course, referencing RCC.
    THEN! This idiot closed by saying: “In my next posting we shall look at King James I, author and prime mover of the most common bible, The King James Bible.”

    Eden, since he said “shall” I guess you have no other choice but to participate. 🙂 However, if the slightest opportunity presents itself, would you ask him (for me) why it is that he has verbal diarrhea on every topic/question, except, the pretty little men in the black robes that just loves little boys, and only occasionally, little girls. He has been asked about this occurrence on several different times and his “dodging rivals only Stefflynn of the LDS clan.

    Charles

  130. Karl said

    Charles,

    A few bad apples on the ground do not make the whole tree bad. Besides, the pedophilia, and sexual abuse problems are not a Catholic monopoly, as the guilty are in all non-Catholic Christian denominations as well. Who can forget the scandals of Jimmy Swaggart, Jesse Jackson, James Baker,….etc What of the abuses in the tens of thousands of individual Christian sects in the world today? These abuses rarely receive the attention given to the Catholic Church by the media.

    Thousands of non-Catholic sects openly acknowledge that they “ordain” homosexual ministers. How many of those would you suppose are pedophiles? However, it is the Catholic Church which has always been the target of detractors since its founding over 2000 years ago. The liberal media do not sensationalize scandals in Protestantism, but love to sensationalize when it is the Catholic Church in involved. They put the Catholic Church under a microscope, looking for any and every possible aberration which they proudly publicize, exaggerating out of all proportion.

    The Catholic Church is, and has always been a communion of sinners, and of saints. It is populated by fallible human beings, and All have sinned, as Romans 3:23,5:12 clearly says. Doesn’t 1 John 1:10 say, If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us? The purpose of the Catholic Church is actually to make saints in heaven out of sinners on earth. Now, contrast that with Protestants sects that foolishly say once saved always saved. That statement really implies that, we can sin as much as we want because we are already saved.

    Finally, the fact that the catholic church does have errant priest does not in any way change the fact that She is the one, and only true Church founded by Jesus Christ.

  131. Eden Hadassah said

    Karl,
    Now I wouldn’t be getting to cocky if I were you. You said:

    “it is nigh impossible, and almost pointless, to hold a sane discussion of scripture with protestants because ALL their bibles, including King James Bible, are mutilated or corrupted, thanks to the “reformers”. So, it is pretty obvious that we are not talking the same verses because we are not using the same reference Bible. I have even been accused of carrying out a hatchet job on Bible verses used in my arguments. Why would I? I exclusively quote, verbatim, the Douay Rheims Bible which is based on the Latin Vulgate, painstakingly put together by the illustrious Church Doctor, St Jerome. You on the other hand are probably using the King James Bible or one of the mutilated protestant bibles handed down to you by the so-called reformers. So we are probably going to be contending about which bible is correct. In any case, here are the facts about the protestant bible.”

    AND

    “An action such as that must surely be reprobated by anyone who claims to be a bible Christian. What is shocking, is the audacity of the man that coolly changed by a stroke of the pen a fundamental doctrine of the Apostle of God, St. Paul, who wrote, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. But this was the outcome of the Protestant standpoint, individual judgment: no authority outside of oneself. However ignorant, however stupid, however unlettered, you may, cut and carve out a Bible and a Religion for yourself. No Pope, no Council, no Church shall enlighten you or dictate or hand down the doctrines of Christ. Thee result we have seen is the corruption of God’s Holy Word.”

    And this is copied and pasted straight from YOUR bible:

    12 For which cause I will begin to put you always in remembrance of these things: though indeed you know them, and are confirmed in the present truth. 13 But I think it meet as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance. 14 Being assured that the laying away of this my tabernacle is at hand, according as our Lord Jesus Christ also hath signified to me. 15 And I will endeavour, that you frequently have after my decease, whereby you may keep a memory of these things.
    16 For we have not by following artificial fables, made known to you the power, and presence of our Lord Jesus Christ; but we were eyewitnesses of his greatness. 17 For he received from God the Father, honour and glory: this voice coming down to him from the excellent glory: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. 18 And this voice we heard brought from heaven, when we were with him in the holy mount. 19 And we have the more firm prophetical word: whereunto you do well to attend, as to a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.
    20 “No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation”… This shows plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one’s private judgment or private spirit, because every part of the holy scriptures were written by men inspired by the Holy Ghost, and declared as such by the Church; therefore they are not to be interpreted but by the Spirit of God, which he hath left, and promised to remain with his Church to guide her in all truth to the end of the world. Some may tell us, that many of our divines interpret the scriptures: they may do so, but they do it always with a submission to the judgment of the Church, and not otherwise.
    21 For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost.
    Second Epistle Of Saint Peter

    He warns them against false teachers and foretells their punishment.
    1 But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction. 2 And many shall follow their riotousnesses, through whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. 3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you. Whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their perdition slumbereth not. 4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but delivered them, drawn down by infernal ropes to the lower hell, unto torments, to be reserved unto judgment: 5 And spared not the original world, but preserved Noe, the eighth person, the preacher of justice, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly.

    Now I couldn’t help but notice that the text, minus the extra biblical commentary in v. 20, has the same meaning. Now you claim to quote straight from the text, verbatum, yet there are some things that you left out of your own scripture quoting from your own BIBLE. But that commentary in v. 20 I find quite interesting, because they turn right around and circumvent the word of God.

    You have tried to sell us enough crazy, so go sell crazy somewhere else…we’re all stocked up here!

  132. Eden Hadassah said

    Sorry, I forgot to put an end to the bold words, and my last two statements were made bold too. I am pretty sure every one knows where the bible verses end and my comment begins.
    🙂

  133. Charles said

    “Karl Says: January 24, 2008 at 1:38 pm Charles, A few bad apples on the ground do not make the whole tree bad. Besides, the pedophilia, and sexual abuse problems are not a Catholic monopoly, as the guilty are in all non-Catholic Christian denominations as well. Who can forget the scandals of Jimmy Swaggart, Jesse Jackson, James Baker,….etc What of the abuses in the tens of thousands of individual Christian sects in the world today? These abuses rarely receive the attention given to the Catholic Church by the media.“

    Oh no you don’t, you seducer of spirits! We are not talking about a few bad apples! Karl continually playing hooky from Bible Classes which he desperately need now is an example of a bad apple; what we are talking about are decrepit old sinful misers that preyed on innocent children 20 to 30 or more years before the media even caught on, or, any of the children came forward. We are talking about brokenness, we are talking about scared for life individuals that the church, YES THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, became a willing participant, an accessory before and after the fact, in that they hid priest and higher ups, reassigned and relocated known pedophiles, and used funds rightfully belonging to God (Oh! My bad); to the Vatican and the Pope, to partially compensate some of the children permanently harmed by the sinful apparatus you refer to as the church. What did Christ say about “the least of these?” What about children in general?

    You like to compare other denominations for RCC predilections! Who in the RCC speaks for the children? Every time someone mentions a priests’ hand in little Karl’s pants, you mention others. Last time it was “over 34,000 yada, yada, yada …..This time, it’s “Jimmy Swaggart, Jesse Jackson, James Baker, et al” The problem is those guys not ministers in the traditional sense; and not one of them has been accused of harming the defenseless children. Might have been different if priest/bishops went after adult women, that would have been more than sinful and bad enough, however, your sin drunk cult abused and continue to abuse children.

    Furthermore, I don’t care what you say: you and if the RCC doctrine is the example that you spew here, is more like LDS than any other denomination you could possibly name.

    You sure must like getting your butt kicked from pillar to post and often. AND! Next time Eden will not have mercy on you! Be scared!

    Charles

  134. Coram Deo said

    The RCC is not alone in its fear of God’s Holy Word being studied by men. In fact the RCC’s Magisterium is not the only group who claims an exclusive knowledge of scripture and the sole ability to properly exegete the Word of God.

    In fact, the works-righteousness, legalistic, demonically inspired spiritual kissing cousins of the RCC known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons) and the Jehovah’s Witnesses make the exact same claim as the RCC! What do these three all have in common you might ask? All three are works based false religions built around corrupted Christianized doctrines of sinful men. In point of fact all three are cults of true Biblical Christianity. The LDS and the JW’s sprung up as cults and the RCC has sadly developed into a fully blown Babylonian mystery cult over the centuries.

    Since the Mormon Elders, the JW’s Watchtower Society, and the apostate RCC’s Magisterium all claim “special knowledge” and “enlightenment” (think Gnosticism) and all lay claim to exclusive interpretive ability of – and strongly discourage their “lay” members from the study of – scripture, which of these should men trust to feed them the truth of the Holy Writ – the whole counsel of God?

    If you said “none of the above” then you are correct!

    God the Father does not fear for men to prayerfully study His Word.

    The risen Savior, Jesus Christ the Son of God is not worried about losing someone to error who prayerfully studies His Word.

    The Holy Spirit is not concerned about losing men to hell that prayerfully study His Word.

    God Almighty is fully capable of saving those who are called by His Holy Name, and He will do so to the uttermost. By the same token those who are not called by His Holy Name, those whose names are not written in the Lamb’s book of Life from the foundation of the world will in no wise be saved and in fact will unfailingly be given over to eternal damnation and destruction.

    These are those who would confound the simplicity of Christ. These are those who like the Judaizers would add carnal requirements of the flesh to the finished work of the cross. These are those who speak of “God”, and speak of “Jesus”, and speak of “repentance”, and speak of “salvation”, but they have redefined the meanings of those words to fit within their own perverse doctrines of men which they exalt and elevate until they make the Word of God of none effect.

    Ask yourself, who stands to lose more if men prayerfully study the Holy Bible; God Almighty or Satan? Does the private, prayerful study of the Holy Bible pose a threat God Almighty, or does it threaten Satan? Which is more God honoring; prayerfully and diligently studying His Word and laying the glorious treasures therein up in one’s heart, or sitting back and passively allowing others tell you what to believe even when it is diametrically opposed to plain, straighforward teaching of the Word of God?

    I know which answer the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Mormons and the RCC have already given.

  135. Charles

    I will not comment on a whim or through emotion regarding something I know nothing about. I looked into the verse you mention, and I have not found anyone who agrees with your interpretation of this scripture.

    I have found MANY interpretations, none of which are from Mormons. I would like to post them all, but I have a lot to say so I will leave a few links instead. And you can look at them for yourself.

    http://biblebrowser.com/1_corinthians/6-12.htm

    http://hubpages.com/hub/Corinthians

    http://www.faithalone.org/news/y1989/89july3.html

    I could find nothing that stated it is ok to take the Lord’s name in vain or break any other commandment because “all things are legal to me”

    I have researched this just for you. I also contacted a friend of mine who went to the Harvard Divinity School. I sent him the comments you and I have shared and this is what his answer to me was.

    “In short, Steffie, he has no idea what he is talking about. As you have pointed out directly to him multiple times, he will not take responsibility for anything he says.

    The “taking the Lord’s name in vain” is the example that provoked his quoting of 1 Cor. 6:12. You caught him in a blatant lie (“I never once took the Lord’s name in vain.”) – and, even worse, you caught him violating one of the most fundamental commandments of the Bible. There was absolutely no way he could deny it anymore, so he admitted it and “wrested” a verse (wrestled with it until it was contorted to fit his argument) to justify what couldn’t be justified any other way. Essentially, he claimed prophetic authority (which is a flawed interpretation of that verse in the first place) – which is simply another case of taking of the Lord’s name in vain. (“Vain” can mean “with no effect” – as in “All his efforts were in vain.” In fact, that meaning – which also translates as “without authority that would cause a true effect” – is the best interpretation I know for that command. The command doesn’t say not to use the name of the Lord, it says not to use it in “vain” – either arrogantly or without a just reason of which the Lord would approve.) His usage OBVIOUSLY is one of which the Lord would not approve.

    If you read the entire chapter carefully, it is apparent that Paul is speaking of the LEGAL system within which the Saints were living – that although it was LEGAL for them to solve their disputes in court, it was not EXPEDIENT (necessary) to do so – that they should resolve their disputes among themselves and NOT rely on the LEGAL system to do so. Paul said, in essence:

    “I (as both a Jew AND a Roman) have access to every LEGAL protection and right (“All things are lawful unto me.”), but even though I have every right to petition the courts for offenses against me by other Saints it is not right for me to handle it that way (“All things are not expedient.”). He then repeats that “all things are lawful unto me” then adds “but I will not be brought under the power of any” – meaning that he will not place his responsibility to resolve his concerns with his fellow Saints under the control of the government – as he criticized them for doing in the verses prior to verse 12.

    In other words, verse 12 is his capstone argument for his critique in the previous verses. He then turns from the legal argument about not submitting to man’s laws in order to stress the higher law of how we should view ourselves as the temple of God – subject to God’s laws, not man’s laws.

    For the person who was challenging you to justify his disobedience of God’s law (“Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord, thy God, in vain.”) to do so by quoting a verse in which Paul is challenging the early Saints to obey the law of God rather than man is the HEIGHT of ignorance and hypocrisy.”

    So there you have it Charles, I looked into it, and found you were totally incorrect in your interpretation.

    Which goes to show why it is necessary and beneficial to have a prophet to interpret and lead us! 🙂

    P.S
    I changed the “slimy green” border, so the invite still stands. It gets a bit crazy when there is more then one conversation going on!

    oh one more thing, your typos do not bug me, what bugs me is you calling myself and people of the Mormon faith names (for example “Maybe only to a half-baked Mormasn that haven’t a clue as to what my God and my Savior is all about, which further demonstrate that your cult is forever lost.”) and as you are trying call me out and bash my faith you cannot even spell Mormon correctly! Do you not see the hypocrisy in that????

  136. Coram Deo said

    And isn’t it interesting how Satan’s oldest tactic, the very first maneuver that wicked old serpent rolled out in the garden to deceive Eve, is put into play by the RCC adherents — casting doubt on God’s Word.

    Can you hear the hiss in the posts above attacking God’s Word? “Yeah, hath God said?”

    Satan and his children love to attack the veracity of God’s Word because he is the accuser of the brethren and he is terrified of God’s Word being spread among men.

    Satan and his children desire to sow doubt and confusion about God’s Word. It’s very sad that this is the tactic of the RCC, the LDS and the JW’s, but again we shouldn’t be surprised that the children of hell should attack the children of light.

    True believers can trust God.

    True believers can rely on God’s Word.

    True believers don’t need to run to a counsel of wicked sinful men to tell them what God has to say because God has spoken to sinful mankind in these last days by His Son in the New Testament of the Holy Bible.

    I heartily encourage you to read Is the Bible Reliable? – Our God-Breathed Bible and stand boldly on the Word of God against all who would challenge its authority, reliability, and trustworthiness for all those who are miraculously born-again of the spirit by grace through faith in the Risen Savior Jesus Christ alone!

    Sola Dei Gloria!

  137. Job said

    steffielynn:

    Just wanted to say that Harvard Divinity School generally isn’t respected around these parts. Do not pretend that you did not know that or do not know why 🙂

  138. Charles D. said

    Steffie, I don’t know who “I also contacted a friend of mine who went to the Harvard Divinity School” is suppose to be,nor do I know what “went to” means given that it is you speaking.

    I have a friend who is now at Harvard, he works on the Custodian Staff, apparently as your friend does.
    If you knew a “friend” who would write such diatribe as a favor to you, because you are a mother, I won’t say why he did it, but imma sur thinkin it! Men have been known to do some fairly dubious things – for a price.

    The “thats why we have a prophet” comment for Mormons are the “be all to the end all.” Please feel free to forward these comments to your friend and invite him on, I would welcome the opportunity to compare (with him personally) who he is, rather than who you say he is. A mormon, is a Morman, is a Moprmon. There is no getting around that fact. But, you will not forward my comments, or, invite him to this site to speak what you pretend he said to you.
    One reason is because he will expose himself as a Mormon, he cannot escape the fact of the curse that rests upon him.

    Steffie, you never cease to dazzle me with your “brillyance}. You are over your head here. Now when the screws stop spinning and smoking, and you get out of your with your humanity intact, find someone of your equal to play with becaue this subject matter is far too serious to play games.

    Charles

  139. Charles D. said

    Steff:

    You challenged me as to why I once asked you about your educational background. You said I only wanted to ridicule you for short-comings or some nonsense such as that. I have taken extraordinary measures to prove you wrong; then, you come with this”

    “oh one more thing, your typos do not bug me, what bugs me is you calling myself and people of the Mormon faith names (for example “Maybe only to a half-baked Mormasn that haven’t a clue as to what my God and my Savior is all about, which further demonstrate that your cult is forever lost.”) and as you are trying call me out and bash my faith you cannot even spell Mormon correctly! Do you not see the hypocrisy in that????”

    If you’re trying to make me sterortype or generalize by saying something such as: on behalf of every blond in America, please stop!!!! I’m not going to do it.

    Job: I sincerely apologize in advance. Everyone familiar with this site knows of and observe the principles observed here. I will not get personal again.

    Charles

  140. Job said

    Charles D: Apology accepted.

  141. Charles D. said

    Thank you.

    I just knew Steff would not get my only point which was hypocrisy, by definition has nothing to do with a typo, or, misspelling Mormon or Mormonism. And it would be too much to ask her to understand that sometimes misspellings are meant as a slight.

    In the interst of knowing that she would not understand, I hereby apologize to Steff for the blond comment; it was personal and I was wrong, irrespective of my frustration. In no way does this mean I feel anything but disdain for anybody or any doctrine that is not of Christ and Him crucified.

    To God be the Glory,

    Charles

    Again, thank you Job.

  142. Karl said

    It is an incontestible fact that there are so many scandals in the Catholic Church. It is also a fulfillment of Holy Scripture which says there will be scandals within the only Church which Jesus Christ founded.

    Matthew 18:7 – Woe to the world because of scandals! For it must needs be that scandals come, but woe to the man through whom scandal does come! And Luke 17:1 – And He said to His disciples, It is impossible that scandals should not come; but woe to him through whom they come.

    If there were no scandals, then Holy Scripture would be in error. In fact, no one should become upset when scandals arise within the Church because Judas the greatest scandalizer of all time, was one of twelve chosen by Jesus Christ Himself. So it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the Catholic Church too, His Mystical Body and must therefore suffer just as He did, is beset by scandals. We do well, though, to remember, always and everywhere, that the Apostle’s dire warning, Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God(1 Corinthians 9-10), applies to everybody regardless of rank, whether pope, bishop, priest, king or laborer, catholic or otherwise. So, nobody, be he pope or king, president or pauper, shall escape eternal damnation if he causes scandal, and departs this life without humbly confessing and doing penance.

  143. kim said

    o much for me to read all of it, I will give you my view based on the original question. The lost do not understand scripture, Jesus meant it to be that way, though some do have knowledge but still dont “know” God. I was a mormon for 20 years, card carrying temple recomend holding true blue mormon. When a Baptist preacher asked me what I thought where the difference in our faiths I boiled it down to that we where the same, but we had more. He never said anything against that, gave me a John Piper book and I loved it, “faith By Hearing” God starting showing me the Truth of His word, I became born again and the Light was exposing the false beliefs of mormonism. Mormons have the spiritual stronghold of doublemindedness, thats how that can hold contradictory beliefs. The Church is true because the book of mormon is true the book of moron is true because JS was a prophet Js is a prophet because the church is true. It a circle with no end. JS and BYoung preached a very different gospel than Hink. The bible is clear, and when you exhaust yourself and a mormon conceded that you have sufficiently proved something they did or do is unbiblical, then they say the bible has error. The best thing to do is continue to share the word, know that are lost but God will do His work. Back to the original, the reason they are all the same or similar is because they are all rooted in the same thing, fathered by the same father, the devil father of ALL lies.
    There is a book btw you can find online called the trail of blood, its about the blood trail of people who have dies for there belief in Jesus. The Baptist among others are not rooted in the Catholic church, where 2 or more are gathered in my name is the church.
    If the church needed to be restored because man was perverting the True Gospel and JS restored it per God, and Jesus then why is the church so different today than 10 years ago, 20 , 30 on and on? Why do they keep changing the temple ceremonies? I know I was there, and they are changing the book of mormon, I knew that when I was one it was changed, I had an original copy of the original. If you want the truth ask a mormon home school mom. And prophets give prophecy, where are all the prophecy’s? Ask a polygamist WHAT THEY BELIEVE AND YOU WILL SEE HOW MUCH THE CHURCH HAS CHANGED SINCE ABOUT THE 1940’S. Dont take my word for it, read the church books, the old ones. I dont have a beef with the strange doctrines of mormonism, its with the fact that they hide it that makes it so upsetting. Be proud of your beliefs, defend your faith, in truth and not sifting sand. Christians dont have double doctrine.

  144. Charles D. said

    Listen you moron, are you telling ME, that “where sin abound, much more grace abound..” ??? So the priests/bishops of the RCC are going to keep on pestering little boys so grace will much more abound?

    Okay, I get it, and there is not a single kid in America, between the ages of 4-18 that is safe in the environs of the RCC! To say nothing of the altar boys whose complaints have not seen the light of day (yet).
    The foregoing is a simplified way of showing you the circular logic that you’re trying to put forth. Get Real.

    Oh! by the way; Tell me Karl, you don’t happen to be, or have been an alter boy in the RCC? Manuscripts or novellas not required. A simple yes/no will suffice.

    Charles

  145. Karl said

    Must you use insulting language in order to make a point?

  146. Job
    I was not aware that the Harvard Divinity School was not respected around these parts. Why would I mention that is where he attended if I knew that? So why is it that the school is not respected in these parts?

    Job what is YOUR interpretation of 1 Cor. 6:12? Do you agree with your friend Charles that it is ok (for him)to take the Lord’s name in vain (because all things are legal to me” (him))? And if this is your interpretation of this scripture how did you come to this conclusion?

    Charles,

    You and all your intellect do not scare me :)! You can have all the book smarts in the world, this sort of intellect is not what God needs or wants us to have. He wants us to have faith in Him. Faith does not come from all the certificates on your wall. It does not matter how smart you may or may not be. Faith is a pure knowledge of God, this knowledge comes from within, from your heart, it is a knowledge that cannot be proven or disproven by books and schooling.

    I have faith. I love my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and My Father in Heaven (who, by the way,loves me!!!)

    🙂

  147. Eden Hadassah said

    Charles will stop using insulting language when Karl stops insulting everyone’s intelligence.

    While it is true that there is scandal in your church, it is your current pope right now Benedict who back in the 1960 made sure that scandals got covered up, not taken care of or disciplined. He hasn’t changed his position on the matter AND he is the viccar of Christ?
    No way.

  148. Karl said

    I am not insulting anyone’s intelligence,neither do I wish too. Show me where I have done that.
    I am only trying to get Protestants to see the Truth by presenting proof using the Douay Rheims Bible and also appealing to reason. How then am I insulting everyones intelligence?

  149. Eden Hadassah said

    Karl,
    you insult everyone’s intelligence by trying to make us believe that your church is THE true church AND you insult our intelligence by trying to lessen the charge about your churches “scandals” by reason…or should I say “by reason of insanity?”
    I think that instead of coming here to try and “reason” with us, maybe you should be contacting all the victims of sexual abuse that left the church and TRY to “reason” with them to come back! Get out that absolutely long list of adults and children that have been devastated by your priest’s shameful actions, get down on your knees and beg their forgiveness. Then throw all those scriptures at them from your bible and tell THEM they are going to hell if they don’t come back.
    Then when you finish that job (it would take you a long time) then go into the mosques and “reason” with the muslims about how they need to come to the “true church.” Don’t forget to call Mohummad a false prophet and make sure you use the same arguments…oh, I’m sorry, the same “reasoning” that you do on this board.
    Then when you are all done with that crowd, take a walk to the Yeshiva in Brooklyn, NY where the Heredi are, and tell them that their Talmud is blasphemous against the Lord Jesus Christ, and don’t forget to tell them that the Pharasees did in fact order the death of Yeshua/Jesus. Make sure you bring a gift to them…money will due in any denomination, since they don’t work for a living but beg instead. “Reason” with them your “true text” that you take so much pride in, and if they don’t murder you (you are more likely to be killed by one of them, then by a muslim)come back to this site and report your progress.

  150. Job said

    steffielynn:

    Come on. Harvard Divinity School is run by liberals, atheists, and gnostics. It does not reflect Reformed, fundamentalist, or even evangelical Bible doctrine. The fact that Harvard and the other Ivy League schools were originally founded as Christian schools primarily to train pastors makes one shudder and weep with regret.

  151. Job said

    Karl:

    Do eastern Orthodox Catholics (you know, the whole Great Schism thing) see the truth? If not, why? The Byzantine churches have as much claim to apostolic succession as does Rome. Actually, they have more, because Acts and the epistles clearly demonstrate that Paul and other apostles established their early churches, but the Bible does not record who established the church at Rome. Extrabiblical evidence, incidentally, points to the church at Rome being founded by Hellenistic Jews fleeing persecution that broke out after the martyrdom of Stephen. That persecution did not affect the “Palestinian” (for lack of a better term) Jews, which was why none of the apostles left Jerusalem until after James the brother of John was killed.

    Now I am certain that your Bible does not have anything in it pertaining to the primacy of the bishop at Rome. If it did, the notion of the bishop of Rome’s primacy would have been asserted before Leo in the fifth century. Several ecumenical councils would not have declared Rome to be co – equal with other churches. And the Byzantine church would not have responded to being excommunicated by the bishop of Rome at the great schism by issuing their own excommunication order against the very bishop that you allege is primary over all Christians on earth!

    Sorry, but history does not support Roman Catholic doctrine. And your Douay Rheims Bible does not support Roman Catholic doctrine either. The Roman Catholic Church says time and time again that church tradition is superior to the Bible because of the authority given to the church through Peter by Jesus Christ. So what good is invoking your Douay Rheims Bible in the first place when the Roman Catholic Church can at any time (as it has at many times) create traditions that ignore and contradict it?

  152. Perhaps the 142 previous comments were simply to keep this thread alive, so that Kim could come with the highly valuable insight provided in comment #143.

    Thank you for chiming in Kim. You’ve said more in 1 comment than all including myself have said in over 100.

  153. Job,

    Ok, so you don’t feel the school is inline with your beliefs. The reason I asked him was because he is a scholar and educated, unlike myself. (And not everyone who goes to this school is a liberal, an atheist, or a gnostic) So who can I ask that is inline with your doctrine? (Did you read the links I provideed?)

    Also you have not answered the other half of my question. Do YOU believe as Charles does? Is HIS interpretation YOUR interpretation? AND how did you come about this interpretation of this scripture????

  154. Charles said

    Steff:

    Come on! This person who you CLAIM “went to” Harvard, is about as foolish as they come. Why don’t you refer a copy of my comments to him and invite him here? I think I know why, but I will let you say.

    I saw the build up you used before consulting with your “friend,” now you must remember that my comment “for christ sakes” is the sole saying involved here. Now take a look at your build up. First of all, do you think in your wildest imagination that ANYONE is going to take your word for what you say you asked this jerk in the first place?? Secondly, on your best day you have problems with simple sentences, to say nothing of the other grammatical hurdles with which you have extreme difficulty. You are suppose to transmit my words to him and do it accurately.

    Now take this (and I use it loosely) “person” with which you consulted “just for you”. He said, in part, as follows:

    “If you read the entire chapter carefully, it is apparent that Paul is speaking of the LEGAL system within which the Saints were living – that although it was LEGAL for them to solve their disputes in court, it was not EXPEDIENT (necessary) to do so – that they should resolve their disputes among themselves and NOT rely on the LEGAL system to do so.”

    Do me a favor, PLEASE! Because I don’t know or have access to your friend please ask him for me, Did Paul also mean that because most hardline Pharasee’s had fashioned both laws and customs of such things as even their food intake, could Paul have meant that established believers should not abuse new believers because of what they ate? And was saying that he could eat anything, but, not everything was good for him?

    It is in his response that will tell you what you need to know about his prowess as a prolific Bible scholar. My thing is…..give the other errors in his diatribe, I can think of some other classes he should have been attending. But be that as it may, it is apparent you will follow almost anyone, anytime, up to and including LDS. Such a shame too.

    Charles

  155. Charles said

    IC: Funny but true. And seems to have the experience to back what is said about Mormonism.

  156. Charles said

    Karl:

    I am sorry for call you moron. Or, were you talking about me asking if you had been or were an alter boy?

    You have to excuse me here but what you said is tantamount to: The boy babies should be thankful for the abuse because they are participating in ushering in of Christs’ return. That the scandals that have and are taking place in RCC, that we all should be glad because Christ is not going to come back until the RCC fulfills Christs prophecies. Do I have that right?

    I guess that gives complete absolution to the Weeks, Jakes, Bynum, Swaggarts, et al, their scandals do not count because only the RCC sins and scandals sufficiently measure up to prophecy level. Does that make sense, even to you?

    You’re cracking me up, Karl.

    Charles

  157. Eden Hadassah said

    Steffilynn,
    What constitutes taking the Lords name in vain? Well for starters, supporting an undoctrinal view of God and trying to solidify it with extra-biblical texts I think sums that one up, all the while claiming your love for Him is actually taking the name of the Lord in vain. It is the commandment that comes right after not making any graven images. This is important because the Lord did not want His name to be used in regards to idolatry, or excuses, or even for vanity, which would be of no effect…very similar to judaics claiming they are “chosen by God”, walking around like they can do what ever they please and have no real regard for the Lord. And example most profound can be found with Israelites proclaiming “Here are your gods who brought you out of Egypt,” and many other instances of dual worship of God and false gods. Another example would be jews taking the Torah and making new laws canceling out the laws of Moses and instead lifting up their oral traditions (Talmud), making the law of no effect.
    Saying “Oh my God” or “For Christ’s sake” is not taking the name of the Lord in vain. But another example of this might be, “The lord told me to eat only cheese burgers every day, I don’t know why, but I will be obedient.” or “god told me that I deserve a Rolls Royce.” Any time someone proclaims something that God did not say, that constitutes, lying, false witness and taking the name of the Lord in vain. People who pray out loud in order to be praised for their long and eloquent prayers and not for speaking to the Lord or lifting up those in prayer, is considered taking the name of the Lord in vain.
    Holy Laughter (a cultic movement, if you are not familiar of it) and saying it is from God is also taking his name in vain.
    False prophets and those who follow their ways and words (and that includes any of your prophets in your church now or even Joseph Smith) takes the name of the Lord in vain.

    So did Charles actually take the name of the Lord in vain? Or do you?

  158. Coram Deo said

    LDS finally admits that Joseph Smith was a polygamist, and that he told different versions of the “first vision.”

  159. Charles D. said

    Eden

    I pray that everything goes great over the weekend and that you have a chance to rest as well. Once again I am going to see if Sunday’s sermon comes from the same book as my daily devotional. I always get a charge when it does.

    Reference a comment you made about spiritual laughter. There is a man (I think his name is spelled Browne) He is from downunder I believe, but, anyway. he came to the Juneau Christian Center as a speaker for their revival. I went because I had heard some things about Mike Rose, the minister and headmaster of their (K-10) christian school. Anyway, this Browne started speaking, then, pointing to people and the laughter started flowing all over the room, even by people that I know and were close associates. What I couldn’t understand was why everyone, including the people to my left and right were falling out and I am the only village idiot that didn’t get it.

    This Browne fellow has appeared on TBN a nuber of times and is in some way affiliated with other TBN featured ministers, including but not limited to Miles Monroe, T.D. Jakes, Benny Hinn among others. Normally, they invite eachother to fundraisers; I mean speaking engagements while giving each others great build-ups.

    I later learned that there is a psychological inducement that is contagious in certain people that laughs for no other reason than the other person laughs. For whatever reason it hasn’t worked for me.

    Well have a good weekend

    Chaz

    TFHMBAICETBA

  160. So no one wants to call Charles out? You want to justify and excuse his words, and at the same time condemn me. I find this interesting, and now I understand where you are all coming from.

    Charles, how can you call someone names that you don’t even know? And for your info I copied and pasted this whole conversation, I did not summarize what I thought you meant or said. He read all of our discussion. Infact, If I was wrong I wanted to know so I could apologize. But from my research I conclude I was NOT wrong, and you are. Sadly I do not see you ever taking responsibility.

    In the end I am glad to have had this discussion. I disagree with you and I find you to be a very sad person. I take with me a new appreciation for the TRUE gospel, and for the amazing, wonderful knowledge that I have been blessed with!

  161. Charles D. said

    Steff

    Just put the man on. In the alternative, please pass on my question to him.

    I notice you’ve not responded to any of the other comments about LDS or Prophet Smith. It seems you view this as a contest between you and I. It isn’t, never has been, and before you attempted to speak to the virtues of LDS, if it wasn’t one thing, then, it was another.

    In spite of the “false” sweetness and niceities that you very skillfully envelop yourself with, I am reminded of the circumstance which greeted you upon your return here. It seems that lying was at the forefront and you thought for whatever reason, that you would get others to go along with you.

    If demons and spirits were so ugly or scary that you could see them a mile away, then, every sensible person would flee without hesitation. Satan is the father of lies and deception, even masked himself as an angel of light. I think such entities will mask themselves whatever way they might appeal to others, e.g., sweetness, niceities, warmth, gaity; then, BAM; it is too late.

    I also notice with considerable interest that you habe neither commented or addressed any of the comments at #143. Why not? Instead of contending with me who know enough about LDS to avoid it’s followers like the pleague, why don’t you take on someone who have actually walked in your shoes? That and pass my quiry on to your little friend.

    I too, and glad to have had this discussion with you. I have measured how you are, against the descriptions ex-Mormons have spoken here. You are profiled to a “T.”

    Regarding your “very sad person” I wish to God that you could be where I am at say 11:50 on Sunday morning, then, see if you still feel the same way. It is my belief that what I hope to experience will rub off on you, before what you are selling will rub off on me.

    Charles

  162. Charles D. said

    SDteff:

    According to you by my saying
    “I wish to God that you could be where I am at say 11:50 on Sunday morning,”
    I have again used the Lord’s name in vain. Right? Consult Harvard again.

  163. Job said

    steffielynn:

    I actually agree with Charles D. Which is a surprise, because quite often Charles D. and I disagree, but we take the position “Hey, that’s OK, we’re both born again Christians that will see each other in heaven.” But in this instance, he is 100% correct.

    Make no mistake, you are correct: Charles D. did sin. He broke the 3rd commandment, using the Name of God as an oath. And you caught him on it. However, in doing so you won a small battle against a man in whom Jesus Christ has won the war. You plucked the mote out of his eye while letting the beam in yours be. For you see, dear Steffielynn, Charles D., whatever flaws he might possess about his person, is still a born again Christian whose salvation is eternally secure and will go to heaven. Though I predict that one day this will change for you and your family, the truth of the matter is that you are not a born again Christian and as such you are, according to the “Sinners In The Hands of An Angry God” sermon by John Edwards, the spider being held over the fire.

    The key, dear Steffielynn, is the difference between Biblical Christianity and false religions. Biblical Christianity is salvation by faith. Mormonism is salvation by works of the law. So is Roman Catholicism with their confessional/penance system, and as a matter of fact so was the false charismatic religion that I grew up in before abandoning it for atheism before finally being born again three years ago. Works is the bondage of the child of Hagar of Sinai. Grace is the liberty of the child of Isaac, which is Jesus Christ.

    So though Charles D. sinned, he need pay no heed to it. The reason is because Jesus Christ took Charles D.’s past, present, and future sins on the cross and said “it is finished.” So because Charles D. accepted that same Jesus Christ as His Lord and Savior and rejects all intermediaries and middlemen between him and his God, his breaking the 3rd commandment in this matter was forgiven before he conceived those thoughts in his heart. Should he continue to sin so that grace should abound? God forbid! But because of the liberty in Jesus Christ, no man or spirit in, above, or under the earth has the right to hold Charles D.’s sin over his head as the spider that is being hung over a fire that represents the current peril of your eternal spirit.

    No use worrying about sin. #1 you will always sin again, with the most common area of sin is your mind and your desire. People sin constantly without doing anything, without even being aware of it. #2 you can’t do anything about them anyway. One sin is enough to condemn you to the lake of fire for eternity, and nothing that you or any other spirit or natural human can do to absolve you of that sin. The only thing that can be done with any sin from the least to the greatest committed when at your conception or at your dying breath is for God to forgive it. But when God forgives that sin, he does not forgive that one sin, but all of them yesterday, today, forever. If you reject that fact, you are in bondage. If you accept that fact, then you are at liberty. Not the liberty of antinomian lasciviousness, but the liberty to glorify God and enjoy Him forever (borrowing from the Westminster Catechism that was in your Lutheran devotional) without the fear of persecution and condemnation from some sin that may or may not be known to you or anyone else.

    Liberty versus bondage Steffielynn. The choice is yours, and I pray that you choose correctly. Thank you.

  164. Job said

    steffielynn:

    Incidentally, I just mentioned that I was born again three years ago. At that time, I was miraculously instantly healed of asthma and kidney disease, and also delivered from a pornography addiction. At the same time, my wife’s failing eyesight was healed as well. As I am not a Mormon, how was that possible? That question applies to you as well Karl.

  165. The very reason I pointed out the fact that he took the Lord’s name in vain was not to condemn him, it was only to show, Charles is not perfect, he is a sinner, therfore Charles cannot judge me.

    The point in all my comments is to get you to realize that there is only ONE judge. It is not Charles, IC or any other person who tells people they will go to hell. I know everyone sins, and the only way to be forgiven is to take responsibility and ask for forgiveness, You cannot act as if God’s laws to not apply to you. This is what I find hypocritical.

    As far as you being healed, I believe it is most certainly from God. But that is the difference between our beliefs. I believe there are many wonderful, rightous, faithful, believing Christians of all denominations.

    My belief is that God loves us all Job. That he will not judge us based upon what we believed Him to be, (a spirit, or having a perfect glorified body) I don’t think that is important. What IS important is that we have faith, and that we love Him. None of us know what He is really like, none of us have seen Him, I think He is so magnificant we could never in a million years understand Him, in all His glory. We will one day, but not yet, and I do not believe He will hold people accountable for something they could never understand no matter how hard they tried!

    These are my beliefs. I have no doubt Job and Charles that you are amazing rightous good men. I have no doubt that you love God and you have taken the Lord Jesus Christ as your Savior. I believe that God loves you, But I also know that He loves me. I feel His love, it is something that I could never even begin to describe, but I feel it. And I love Him, with all my heart and soul. You may disagree, you may not believe me, but God knows my heart, He knows My sweetness and kindness are real. He knows I love Him more then anything, and I KNOW He loves me!

    🙂

  166. Eden Hadassah said

    Steffi,
    Your victim mentality is astounding and at the same time typical of many Mormons that want to be called Christians.
    Get over it already. We have accepted that you are a Mormon, but you just can’t accept the fact that you are not a Christian.
    That’s too bad, self deception is one of the hardest habits to break!

  167. Karl said

    Job,

    Let’s first get the facts right. The Orthodox Eastern Church is the outcome of the Greek Schism, dating from the time of Photius of Constantinople (9th century), a high ranking and highly learned official in the Byzantine Empire. On deposition of Ignatius, round about AD 858, he was hurried through all the ecclesiastical degrees and installed by the Emperor Michael III as Patriarch of Constantinople. Pope Nicholas I (820 – 867 AD) strongly objecting against the irregular manner in which Photius was elevated, convoked a council at Rome which deposed and excommunicated him. Photius, countered by clothed the conflict in doctrinal garments thus precipitating conditions that created the Schism between the Eastern and Western Churches. Photius was deposed and sent into exile several times, the last time being in AD 886. He died a few later in an Armenian monastery but the schism commenced by him, continues to this day.

    The Eastern Orthodox Church, denies the supremacy of the Pope, claims that the Catholic Church erred in prescribing celibacy for the clergy, and teaches that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father alone, instead of from the Father AND The Son. A clear refutation against the third objection is found in John 15: 26 which says; But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me. “Whom I will send”… This proves that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Son, as well as from the Father: otherwise He could not be sent by the Son.

    On Papal Supremacy, St Clement (died AD 100), a disciple of St Peter, wrote in AD 96, these words to the Church of Corinth; “If any man should be disobedient unto the words spoken by God through us, let them understand that they will entangle themselves in no slight transgression and danger.” Moreover, he commands them to render obedience unto the things written by us through the Holy Spirit. St Clement was, evidently, taking for granted that the Corinthians, who were Greeks, would accept his juridical authority. St Peter was also the Bishop of Antioch in Syria briefly from 36-42 AD. He established his residence in the Syrian capital as he traveled about the world “confirming the brethren.”. It was in Rome, however, in the year 42 AD, that he established his permanent Chair. And, as every historian (including rabid anti-Catholics) worthy of the name admits, it was in Rome, on Vatican Hill, where the Prince of the Apostles was crucified in the year 67 AD.

    However, no apostolic see, not even that of Antioch, the foundation of whose Patriarchate is traced to Peter, ever claimed primacy of honor and jurisdiction over Rome. Even during the initial stages of the Greek schism, Photius never ever claimed supremacy over the universal Church. As a matter of fact, the Greek separatists attacked Rome’s claim, not of inheriting the permanent See of Peter, which honor they were rational enough not to question, but of having a primacy of legislation and jurisdiction over all Eastern Churches as well as those of the West. This was the first time in the nine hundred years of the Church’s existence that there was any united resistance to the authority of the Bishop of Rome. In fact, enforcing it, in the Scriptures, was the crystal clear preeminence of Peter over the other apostles.

    In response to your objection to Tradition, you are basically asserting that if it is not in the Bible then it cannot be True. But the New Testament itself teaches that it does not contain all that Our Lord did or taught.

    And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book.(John 20-30). And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written everyone, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written Amen.(John 21-25)

    Since the Bible is incomplete, it needs the spoken or historically recorded word called Tradition to supplement it. Therefore, The Church has carefully conserved the unwritten truths which Our Lord and the Apostles taught by word of mouth, teaching by historical records known Tradition. Even Protestant Bibles acknowledge that many Christian truths were to be handed down by word of mouth. For example,

    2 Thess. 2-15: Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
    2 Tim. 2-2: And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

    Hence not only Scripture but other sources of information must be consulted to get the whole of Christ’s teaching. Religions founded on Bible only belief are necessarily incomplete.

    Also consider that the first book, Matthew’s Gospel, was not written until about ten years after Our Lord’s Ascension. John’s fourth gospel and Book of Revelations were not written until about 100 AD. Generally, the bible could be mass produced only after the invention of the printing press 1450 years after Christ (The Gutenberg Bible, the first substantial book printed with movable type appeared in 1455). Now, imagine how the “Bible-only” theory would have appeared at a time when the books of the New Testament were not only unavailable, but hardly existent. It is an absurd proposition at best because if the bible ALONE were the sole rule of faith and morals, where would that leave the souls that lived during the first 1450 years when the bible was not yet widely available? Surely, there has to be another way.

    By the way, traditions are not created. They are handed down.

  168. Charles D. said

    Steff:

    Tow things, no three. Can you follow this without either changing subjects, thinking I’m victimizing you, hate you, or intend any manner of evil against you? Admittedly, I will get my dig in within my last sentence:

    1) Pass on to your Harvard friend what I asked you to some days ago.

    2) Tell me in 2 paras or less, how and if the (I guess, new to you) revelation about the prophet Joe, his self-admission, his wives, and his and by default, the LDS’ lack of candor. Keep in mind, had he lived, in about 8 years or less, he could have chosen one of your daughters and you as a true follower, would have been powerless to do a thing about it.

    Okay, my dig: So steff, how is the LDS Women Movement coming?

    Charles

    Mow, ask yourself, what are the implications, by your going straight for the “dig” first? Think about it, and if you have to lie to deny that you did.

  169. Charles D. said

    Karl:

    It is very apparent that you are not an equal opportunity writer; so once again I am denied the benefit of your wisdom, and lacking that, the opportunity to cajole about it, and all because you simply cannot contain yourself to just a novel. Nooooooo! You have to do the what amounts to the mini screen play of War and Peacr thing; and you’re not even a member of the writers’ Guild.

    Enjoy reading your own work product, do you? Well when you learn that brivity is the soul of wit, maybe some of us short readers can enjoy your masterpieces.

    Thanks anyway.

    Charles

  170. Karl said

    Charles,

    I am grateful for your apology. I got nothing more to say to you lest I incur another lashing from your barbed tongue.

  171. Charles D. said

    Your sarcasm noted, but, two things. First you weren’t directing your comment to me in the first place, don’t believe me at a quick look/see. Secondly, I just always in such a state of anxious anticipation to cling onto your words of wisdom, I felt neglected, and I know you can do better; (note mine).

    It is not my barbed tongue that you will have to worry about in the end times, but then, were you not so devastatingly steeped in the art of protecting pedophiles, you might have known that.

    Wish you wellness, vision, spiritual riches, and salvation.

    Charles

  172. Charles I will invite him here, but I cannot promise that he will come. Honestly I do not want him to join our discussion because I care about him as a person and I do not think he deserves to be attacked and treated like poop, and that is all that he will get by comming here.

    But I will ask, and he can choose for himself.

    Why are you so desperate to talk to him anyways??? (I hope it is to have a respectful conversation)

    2nd

    I believe Joseph Smith was a prophet. Do I believe he was perfect NO. I did not live back in the early days of the church, so I cannot fairly judge what went on in the past. But from my experiences in THIS day, I can say with all of my heart I believe the church is true.

    3rd
    The LDS women have one of the largest strongest womens organization in the world, so I don’t get your “dig”. Women in the church are cherished and respected!

    And LASTLY!!!!!

    You all try to bash my faith and my character, and then when I defend myself you say I am “playing the victim”. Defense of ones self from unfair and false attacks, does not equal “playing the victim” Stop the attacks and I will stop having to defend myself! (and stop watching so much Dr. Phil!)

    My kindness does NOT equal weekness! I am who I am, and if YOU (eden) don’t like me, well YOU will just have to get over it because i’m not changing who I am!

    You can label me whatever you want, it does not change the fact that I love and follow Christ!

  173. Charles D. said

    Steff

    I would promise not to either ridicule or try to get you to see the truth. But I cannot say what the future hold, and, with each response, you come back with some,,…something that would make me break such a promise.

    I cannot change or make you want to change or anything like that. But with your comment that you still believe that Smith was a true prophet in the face of what you knew (but remained silent about) long before it was reveal here, then you have taken a position that is fixed in time, and absence of repentence, fixed in eternity, and that is your cross to bear.

    I will say that you are very predictable. I can predict both, your thoughts and subsequent behavior. And if I can do that from where I am; with the LDS you never stood a chance and you still don’t.

    Regarding your “(and stop watching so much Dr. Phil!) comment, doe that constitute a judgement of me? Actually, I could care less. But it seems to me, that at some point in time, you would have had to watch it in order for you to know anything about him. For your information I don’t watch him. however, he was in the news recent for trying to worm his way into the Brittney Spears deal. That attracted my attention to your comment, because if there is anyone who seems to be on a like collision course with the roller-coaster of life, absent spirituality like the young Ms. Spears, it is you. Like she, you probably can’t see it, I think you actually do, but would rather turn a blind eye to it for whatever reason. But make no mistake about it, you are on such a course.

    Charles

    P.S The reason I wanted your friend on here is to ask if he too is a Mormon, so maybe you can answer that since he is a friend of yours.

    If not, maybe he could convince you of your ill-conceived ideas about such things as what is love, God, Christ, Salvation, good works, evul works, and spiritual blindness and a very confused mind(which you have, don’t ask me, ask him). Show him your past 2 posts. If he says anything except, right now you are lost, then. he’s no friend, but a sin enabler.

  174. Coram Deo said

    Why The LDS/Mormon Church
    Will NEVER Be Part Of The Body Of Christ

  175. Coram Deo said

    Understanding Mormonism

    Generally speaking, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are model citizens. They are devout in their beliefs, family-oriented, are clean in language and appearance, eschew smoking, drinking, and carousing, and are active in the PTA, as well as in politics. Mormons are often the first to show up on your doorstep with a fresh-baked loaf of bread when you move next door to them. They are hard-working and honest people. LDS kids, for the most part, are the kind of kids parents like their own children to “hang out” with because they tend to stay out of trouble and have strong moral values. The question then begs to be asked, “So what is the problem? They sound like good Christian people.”

    The problem exists in the fact that the “gospel” as defined by Mormonism is a false gospel founded on the teachings of a false prophet and false “apostles.” Furthermore, Mormonism is not just another denomination of Christianity. Rather, it is a quasi-Christian religion that is not founded on Biblical truths, but on untested revelations given to LDS Church leaders. This comes as a bold statement and one to which Mormons would most likely take offense. What are the reasons then, for making such an assertion and why is it important and urgent for a true Christian to know?

    Click “Understanding Mormonism” above to learn more.

  176. curtde said

    Charles,

    Steffie asked me if I would comment here. I agreed simply as a token of my respect for Steffie’s heart. We don’t see things eye-to-eye on many matters of doctrine; we have differing levels of understanding and different backgrounds and different perspectives on MANY things; I respect, however, her sincerity and desire and commitment to follow what she believes – even when we do not agree – even in our differences.

    Honestly, I have no desire to comment here. I have been deeply involved in witnessing efforts for over 20 years, and the tone and venom and spite and disdain I read in the transcript Steffie sent to me is exactly what I have worked hard to avoid in my ministry. It is what has driven so many souls from Christ – souls whom I have dedicated my life to serving and who carry deep scars that make it difficult for them to accept a God of judgment AND love – one who has and will redeem their sinful souls. They feel the condemnation in words like yours, and they seek the love of which they read in the New Testament. They want to feel His holy ministration, not the stripes with which He was beaten. Please realize that words and actions and attitudes like yours drive away from God as many souls as they bring to God – at least, based on my experiences trying to heal the body of Christ and retrieve the one lost sheep.

    After reading comment #138, I have even less desire to contribute here. You hinted in the second paragraph at the possibility that Steffie whored herself for my initial response (and it wasn’t at all subtle), in the process smearing me as an adulterer. I’m not sure I have ever heard or read such a vile and vicious comment from anyone who professes to be a disciple of Christ.

    Jesus never once said, “You are condemned if you don’t understand everything I am saying.” He reached out in love and compassion and tenderness to those who were lost – not with vitriol and derogatory comments and name-calling and insults. In fact, when He gave us the wonderful Sermon on the Mount, he included these words in Matthew 5:43-47:

    43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
    44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
    45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
    46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
    47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
    (I used the King James Version, since that is what Steffie has told me she uses – and I have no idea if there is a different one that is preferred by a majority of those who comment here.)

    I see little or no loving of your enemies in this thread. I see little or no doing good to them. I read this thread, and I simply can’t imagine Jesus saying the things that you say in the way that you say them. I can’t see Him looking lovingly at any of you, even Steffie, and mocking your intellects or your vocabulary or your efforts to understand Him. That is not the Jesus I see and feel and experience and love – the Jesus who dwells within us as we stumble and struggle and fall. I see much here of kicking and punching and mocking and spitting upon – much of persecution – and little of long-suffering and kindness and love unfeigned.

    I was direct and blunt in my response to Steffie, because I was appalled at your use of I Corinthians 6:12 to justify sin. I gave her the big picture view of that chapter. I could have gone into much more detail about meats and customs and other nuances, but her question was not for a dissertation; it merely was a plea for help in understanding what you had written.

    Your name calling does not bother me at all. I have been called much worse in my life in the trenches, usually by those whom I am trying to bring to Christ and sometimes by fellow believers who have lost sight of the love and grace of God. In all humility, I admire greatly your passion and conviction, since, as Paul, I would that you were not lukewarm, but rather hot or cold. However, I simply cannot admire your tactics, since I deal with their aftermath on a regular basis. I spend my life trying to heal the wounds you inflict, and I am far too involved to take more than this time to spend arguing about points of doctrine while others starve – both physically and spiritually.

    I am not condemning you; my God has forbidden such arrogance, and I am striving to serve him in humble gratitude. I cannot, however, read the bile that is spewed here without pleading for some true Christian charity and love – for the compassion with which He lived His life – for the fruits of the spirit that He said would be the true measure of discipleship. Jesus NEVER ridiculed and berated and scorned the sincere and ignorant and poor and misinformed. Please, do not do so in His holy name.

    I will not be following the responses to this comment. I will not be back. As I said at the beginning, I am only here out of respect for Steffie’s sincere effort to understand Jesus and His teachings – as an attempt to appeal to your discipleship as we try to do the same fundamental thing – touch the hearts and minds and souls of God’s elect, no matter where or when we find them. I simply believe Jesus touched their hearts through genuine and palpable love – not through brow-beating and the type of disgusting accusations I read here.

    May God bless our discipleship and spread God’s grace and good news is my humble prayer.

    Curt

  177. Charles,

    So me and Britney Spears are alike? Hmmm,

    I so have to break this one down,

    Britney Spears
    1. drinks
    2. smokes
    3. does drugs
    4. is famous
    5. sings
    6. neglects her kids
    7. is southern baptist/sometimes kabbalah, and has recently gone back to her baptist roots

    Steffielynn
    1. doesn’t drink
    2. doesn’t smoke
    3. drug free
    4. NOT famous
    5. can’t sing
    6. stay at home mom, who focuses all my time and energy on my children.
    7. i’m Mormon

    I’m not seeing how we are alike Charles.

    Also I have many wonderful friends. More then half of my friends are not LDS yet they STILL love me, (despite the fact that I am a sweet Mormon. 🙂

    AND
    I’m sure you’ll be super excited to know that Curt has posted a comment here, he emailed me and told me it is in moderation.

    Also as far as his religious preference, this is what I know, Curt’s ministry is with people with serious issues. Often he has kids in his home who have nowhere else to go, he is an amazing person. He believes I am a Christian, and he is respectful and kind.

    And Charles if I am so predictable why keep having a conversation with me? Why do you continue to ask me questions that you already know the answer to?

    I realize I am not up to your speed and brilliance, so why bother???

  178. Job said

    steffielynn:

    Britney has not gone back to her liberal version of Southern Baptism (the only thing that her pastor has ever publicly criticized her for was being photographed holding a cigarette, saying that her implied endorsement of smoking made her a bad role model for kids; I am not making this up!).

  179. Charles D. said

    Steff:

    Let me start by saying that predicting what you will do or how you will react to something in no way means nor have I said that I was psychic. Being a born again christain, psychics and that ilk do not stand in great favor with me, or God I might add.

    Maybe it is unfair to say it, but, you haven’t disappointed me as yet. I don’t think you can. I don’t attribute that to any kind of “smarts” or “special” abilities because I would be found wanting in those areas. Thing is…I am super satisfied with what God has given me and He is not done with me yet. He has certainly given me a goodly number of years, taught me the difference between
    intelligence and wisdom, to be pleased and content with where I am, so, anything outside of what He provides to me liberally, I have no need for much else, AND He taught me how and when to bring my “wants” into subjection.

    I haven’t seen Curt’s comment as of yet, but, I’m sure I will see it/them eventually. I am tempted to now ask you, if he is such a good friend of yours, then, why isd it that he doesn’t know that you are not a Christian? Is he one? But, then I’ve asked you that before. Seems that I always have to ask you 5 questions if I want 3 answers, and 4 for 2 sliding scale sort of thing.

    Okay, regarding the Brittney Spears/Steff comparison you probably most-painstakingly enuberated; there are much deeper questions remaining in order to validate the point you are trying to make. Among, them, are: what are the baseline causation for Brittney’s behavior? What really makes her do the things that fill scandal sheets? Is it mental or drugs? Why, would her former minister render such an indictment against her, if she was in fact a member of his congregation? Why would a mother come to a custody hearing that will determine, in essence, the future welfare and custody of her children, then leave before the hearing gets under way? In addition to contempt of court, a lesser known person would have ended up in jail. And, is she crying out to be jailed? For sure that might prove suicidal for her because she appear to lack stress copeing skills.

    It is reported that she said “so what if I loose the boys, I’ll just have some more..” Other than being an insane utterence, if she said that, it lacks the motherly inner person that God enbue Mother as He sees them and design them to be. So, I guess if I had to draw up a list to compare the two of you, I would have to include a bottomline for where Brittney’s behavior and lack of control will leave her over the longhaul. Right now, it is detrimental. The evidence is there, the advice have been given, she can see what have happened to others that pursued similar routes in life. As for you, almost the same thing. The personage that you still believe is a prophet is not, you are well aware, or, have been told that Jesus is not a mere Prophet; and you have been told that all of the love, sweetness, and nicities, will not exempt you from the flames of hell; yet, you believe that God loves YOU so much that He would not sentence you to such an eternity. You fail or refuse to understand that you are sentencing yourself. I cannot understand that and I have tried!

    You further claim that God will not sentence you for things that you don’t know. Do you realize that you will not be able to even offer that as an excuse before the Judgnebt Seat of God. Suppose God whips out the posts that you have written her; but, more importantly, suppose He whips out the ones that were written to you?

    I just hope that you are young, and that with experience in the laboratory of life, you come to know the saving grace of Christ. That He may quicken the Holy Spirit to remove the blinders that you now have, and without that veil, you may see.

    NEWS FLASH///Okay, I just saw Curt’s comments. I am particulary interested in maybe 3 things:

    1. He did not identify his faith or affiliation with any organized religion. That within itself is not a bad thing, however, given the remainder of his soliloquy, as in the below, he made judgements that he cannot verify, commented on my charatcer to which members of my church would not only disagree, but, most probaly seek to refute his vein guesses/charges with demonstrated evidence. I see a non-profit org. of some sort, in his present and future.

    2. His statement that you are seeking the Lord. Specifically, he said: ” I am only here out of respect for Steffie’s sincere effort to understand Jesus and His teachings -” I don’t know about you Steff, but, I would not consider one a friend who knew something of such grave consequenses and did not tell me. If you are not seeking Jesus, then, what are you trying to learn? Please enlighten me.

    3. His words below, whether he knows it or not, is in fact a sin. Not only that but “spiritual presumptuousness” is a veru dangerous thing. He upsurps Gods’ and God alone prorogative. I am not aware of any practitioner that have faired well. Although he [said] he would not visit this site again, and thats too bad, because I certainly would like for him to quantify the number of souls that I personally am responsible for driving away from God. Who knows, maybe Curt himself, since he never particularly identified with God.

    Curt said: “Please realize that words and actions and attitudes like yours drive away from God as many souls as they bring to God – at least, based on my experiences trying to heal the body of Christ and retrieve the one lost sheep.”

    Listen, I will not allow you to be drawn into anything involving my disagreement for things that he thinks or said. Please take only the comments I directed to you personally and the others are his and my agreement or disagreement, I hold absolutely nothing he said against you.

    Charles

  180. Diane said

    Job,

    “not everyone who says to Me Lord, Lord, shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but HE WHO DOES THE WILL OF MY FATHER in Heaven” “Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your Name, cast out demons in Your Name, and done many wonders in Your Name?” “And then I will declare to them, ‘I NEVER KNEW YOU; depart from Me, you WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS!”

    To habitually and recklessly malign, vilify and slander others is LAWLESSNESS. It IS antinomianism that seeks it’s justification in a gospel that JESUS DOESN’T PREACH. People who wilfully commit acts of slander are of the devil and will NEVER find “security” or “rest” in Christ unless they repent.

    Please, since we are teach all things that Christ commanded, could you show here where Christ says “though someone sins they need pay no heed to it”. That boldly contradicts Jesus.

    Charles,

    Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior, and says you will know them by their fruits. Constantly twisting the responses of others is called lieing. You have continuously shown that you are not submitted to Christ and His Word, but by your fruit, are submitted to the father of lies. You continually mock Christ, there is no need for anyone to “ask people at your church”, you have born witness to the fact that Christ Word does not abide IN YOU. Your behavior is not of the Holy Spirit.

  181. Coram Deo said

    Diane’s comment #180 is spot-on accurate and is 100% Biblical truth.

    Only relatively recently has the Satanic lie of the “carnal Christian” entered into the professing church. Even as recently as 75-100 years ago such unbiblical teaching would have been roundly and soundly rebuked for the lie from the pit of hell that it is. A study on antinomianism would be in order here.

    Our modern culture of easy-believism has produced a bitter harvest of false converts, broad path false believers who are twice the sons of hell as they who produced them. Sadly the undiscerning have difficulty distinguishing between the professing church and the church invisible.

    Yet true believers need not lose heart because God Almighty is sovereign and in full control of all circumstances and will continue to regenerate and call out His own remnant, those whose names were written in the Lamb’s Book of Life from the foundations of the world for His purposes and His glory alone!

  182. Charles D. said

    Diane, now, you of all people propose to teach Job about scripture or the meaning of verses. Is that a thus said the Lord, or, thus says Diane? Lets be clear, what you intend to do in your heart (and you are a liar in you dent it), is deliver a message to a third party, however, you lack the spiritual courage and are insecure about which you speak!

    You might be describe as a “silent assassin” or “drive-by artist” I will just call you a spiritual coward who lacks the moral fiber to face either on or up to the intended party of your weakly diatribe. Is Diane angry that I address comments to her? Well get over it! I cannot remember addressing you recently and if you have something to say to me, certainly you don’t have to use Job as my proxy.

    Whatever happened to “Christians who have ought against a brother” then, go to that brother and if that brother refuses to mend his ways, then, take 2 or 3 witnesses? Are you selectively persecuting me for a reason you have yet to state? Or do cherry pick only those portions of scripture that constitute spiritual one-gunmanship, your favor? You have drastically failed at both and your utterances in it’s entirety are not pleasing to Christ.

    Your observation that: “ You have continuously shown that you are not submitted to Christ and His Word, but by your fruit, are submitted to the father of lies“ include the times that you have asked me personally to pray for your grandson? Or, were you trying to garner a one-way ticket to the “father of lies“ on my hell-bound VISA? You cannot have it both ways, for among other reasons: let not a double-minded man think that he can get anything from the Father (speaking about God and not whomever you have chosen to serve today. .

    You say: “there is no need for anyone to “ask people at your church”,” Then, I suppose they would fair better by asking the all seeing, all wise Diane. At least the members of my church will have seen the fruits of my works and could therefore render a more accurate appraisal than you who have never met me, yet ask me to pray on your behalf.

    True be told, you know about as much about Christ and/or the Bible as you do about vasectomy surgery. You might have an idea what it is, you might have heard about them, but you know all along, that you could never have one. Now I suppose you will attempt to make this a XXX-rated insult issue. I could care less.

    In closing, I am perfectly satisfied in my relationship with my heavenly Father. Thing is, the relationship is between He and I and it is personally. Maybe you can help me out here: I am unable to find any scripture that remotely suggest that God had appointed you arbiter of either my standing or my relationship with Him. I do however, find that salvation is an individual thing of which you play zero part in. And am I ever so glad that God never takes a day off, worst yet, that He would leave you in charge.

    I hope you have a nice life, I wish you health and wisdom, but above it all, I truly hope that you come to know the saving grace of my Lord and Savior Jesus, the Christ, and Him crucified.

    Pray and Repent,

    Charles

  183. Charles D. said

    This apply equally to any observers who, for whatever reason, did not see through the spiritual blinders you so sheepishly included in your assessment of my spiritual state of being.

    Charles

  184. Diane is a strong person. I am saying this as a outsider looking in. Not as a “look Diane is siding with me” because I do not believe that is what she is doing. (she has been clear to me that she does not agree with my faith, BUT she has been respectful and loving at the same time)

    She is strong and brave because she went on a site where she knew she would be put down and called ugly things, and she spoke up anyways.

    It is easy to agree and say “well he’s Christian so we are on the same team. And she is Mormon and it’s us against her so i’ll just agree with HIM even though I know he is wrong, because he is Christian.” THAT is cowardly.

    It is not easy to speak in defense of truth, when you know you will be ridiculed by a brother.

    Charles you can’t stand anyone who stands up to you. Diane is speaking DIRECTLY to you, she is not using Job to get her message across. YOUR name is IN her message.

    To tear her down for speaking her mind (and the truth) is sad. And If she asked you to pray for her grandson i’m sure she was trying to connect with you as a Christian. It is AWFUL that you would even bring something like that up.

    Charles it is people like you that give Christians a bad name. It is people like you that drive people AWAY. I hope one day you will change your tone and truly love ALL of God’s children and speak to them with love. Stop the personal attacks take responsibility, and move on.

  185. Charles D. said

    Steff:

    ANYONE else will get what is meant by speaking throug another person EXCEPT you!

    You have an awful habit of 1) sticking your nose where it doesn’t belong and 2) exposing your ignorance while so doing.

    Do yourself a favor and butt out. I am not aware of ANYONE on or visiting this site that are as ill-equipped as you are in taking up a cause. Then too, this was an A-B conversation, can you C your way (as a Mormon) of steering clear of doctrines that are foreign to you?

    You have a very annoying habit and I end up like the heavy because you are too afraid to admit that you are looking for something other than LDS to believe in. Don’t know about your Mormon book, but in the Holy Bible, there is scripture, referring to the Pharisees questioning the blind man’s parents, their reply was “ask him yourself, he is of age” and I say to you; let her speak for herself, Diane is of age.

    Charles

  186. Coram Deo said

    Mormons ARE NOT Christians! The Mormon church and its teachings are lies spawned from the pit of hell. Mormons are either deceived or they are deceivers, there are no other options. Mormon theology leads its followers to eternal damnation and torment in hell fire where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth forever and evermore. Mormons have redefined the meanings of Biblical terms so that they can sincerely and honestly say things like “I love my Heavenly Father” and “I trust Jesus as my Savior” but their definitions of these words ARE NOT the same as the teachings of the Holy Bible. Mormons hold to a “Bible plus” religion and believe and proclaim “another gospel”. The very title of their own so called “sacred text” claims to be “another testament of Jesus Christ” and as such they are accursed and abide under the wrath of the One True Living God, the unique and individual Infinite Creator and Judge of the universe, THE ONE AND ONLY GOD in all existence.

    This Directory lists articles on the LDS Church, Mormonism and speaks to subjects such as those listed below:

    The bible vs. the Book of Mormon
    DNA vs. The Book of Mormon
    Called to be free

    Which god[s] do Mormons worship- is Adam the Father of Jesus Christ and all mankind?

    Why the Mormon Church is NOT the TRUE church Jesus Christ started

    Contradictions in Mormonism- How does the book of Mormon stand up today to its original copy

    Mormonism’s Teaching on Pre-existence (pt.1)-Looking at the gods plan of salvation; from intelligence to being birthed as pre-existent spirits in heaven to becoming man to progression of Godhood .

    Lucifer’s Fall in Heaven, Mans Exaltation on Earth (pt.2)- Are we and Jesus the brother of Lucifer? The Jesus of Mormonism or the Jesus of the Bible?

    Moroni, Other Sheep, and Two Sticks add up to Zero- Mormonism’s proof of being another Testament of Christ.

    Interview with a Mormon representative – Kent Dunford agreed to appear on the Let Us Reason program for our questions on Mormonism.

    Mormons use TV media to promote Christians Holy Book

    Adding to the Bible- Joseph Smiths additions to the KJV.

    Which version of the vision should Mormons believe? A look at all the confusing elements and stories of Joseph Smith’s vision as told by himself and the prophets of the church.

    Polygamy revisited- A Biblical study on polygamy from the Bible compared to the Mormon’s perspective.

    A Mormons pre-existence- Looking at the Gods plan for salvation. From mans intelligence to being birthed as pre-existent spirits in heaven to Godhood from the Mormon perspective

    I bear you MY testimony- What is true testimony of God’s saving grace to be his child and the differences in Mormonism.

    You said What when?- LDS tries to change their position on the blacks being curse.

    What’s in a name?- The necessity of the correct name of the Mormon Church.

    Are you living the Celestial law? – Are Mormons achieving what they are teaching?

    Making sense out of nonsense- The straw man argument of praying to receive and answer on the Book of Mormon.

    RLDS -Reformed church- The teachings of the Reformed Church of Latter Day Saints

    Basics of Mormonism- A Condensed overview of their teachings.

    What do they actually mean when they say- How do we interpret what they teach?

    Image and Likeness of God or man?- Whose image is man made in and what does it mean? Are we physically like God?

    Adams test- Did Adam fail or succeed by eating the forbidden fruit?

    In the Beginning MAN- Which came first man or God?

    The virgin birth ?-What do Mormons mean by Mary is a virgin?

    We’re Christians too- Mormons now wanted to be accepted as Christians where before they mocked them!

    The Confusion of Mormonism- The current state they were and are in.

    Polygamy a Revelation from God ?-Where do these teachings come from and who changes their mind?

    Baptizing live people for dead people to be saved-Can Mormons save people who are dead by being baptized in their place?

    Why do you say the things you do?- Who attacked which Church first?

    It’s in Black and White-The new revelation given for the blacks to have the priesthood.

    History of the Mormon Church- The timeline of their history.

    What Ye think of the Scriptures-Their book of Mormon, is it a compliment or competitor to the bible? What do Mormons think of the bible , really?

    How was the Book of Mormon translated? -By the power of God? The Urim and Thummim we are told. Not really.

    Can I get a Witness for the book of Mormon?-What happened to the Witnesses? While they say Christianity was in apostasy, they too have an apostasy.

  187. This is not a Mormon VS Christian debate anymore. Charles for some reason you have made it personal, and as “ill equipped” as I may be At least I am not acting like a 4 year old bully. I am sick and tired of your evil hateful words.

    People have different opinions then you. That does not make them wrong or liars. You try to belittle me (and everyone who disagrees with you) every chance you get, it is really getting OLD. I am a good person, I do the best I know how. And I think I am pretty dang smart for a young, stay at home mom, even though I do not have a bunch of certificates on my wall telling me so.

    I am Mormon, I am a good loving person, I love my Heavenly Father and My Savior Jesus Christ. Nothing you can say or do can EVER change that.

    I may not be as brilliant as you Charles, but I wouldn’t trade my heart for ALL your brains, I have been very blessed and I thank God for the love I have, even for you, someone who hates me for no reason.

  188. Fran said

    Coram Deo,

    What’s the difference between a person that condsiders themself a chritian and a Mormon that condsiders themsevles to be a christian, and neither are true believers?

  189. Charles D. said

    But, you would trade both for my salvation. Steff; after reading the post preceeding yours, I view your comments, what you call your sweetness, niceness, good heart, in an entirely different light now. I would actually, need such a reference manual to follow you.

    Given your core beliefs, when has a Mormon ever contended for my faith or the faith Diane portends? The truth is, you weren’t nor can you ever! Therefore, the following; doe it even make sense to you? “”This is not a Mormon VS Christian debate anymore”

    Take a lok at # 186, then, read your statements below:
    “I am Mormon, I am a good loving person, I love my Heavenly Father and My Savior Jesus Christ. Nothing you can say or do can EVER change that.”

    I would not try to change you or your beliefs under the circumstance. You will just be a lost damned person throughout all eternity. Finally, in view of 186, even Diane’s support of you, or lack thereof is of non-effect.

    You can leave with your humanity partially intact, or, you can continue with your crafts, dark arts, and LDS dogma. The choice is entirely up to you.

    Charles

  190. Charles D. said

    Fran

    Give me some true life examples of what/whom you are talking about, and I will give answering your question a shot. In the event I am one of whom you refer, you have my permission to use my name. Proudly.

    Charles

  191. Coram Deo said

    Fran Says:
    January 27, 2008 at 8:29 pm
    Coram Deo,

    What’s the difference between a person that condsiders themself a chritian and a Mormon that condsiders themsevles to be a christian, and neither are true believers?

    Fran,

    A person who professes Jesus Christ as his/her personal Lord and Savior and who professes to believe and practice the historic, orthodox, Biblical Christian faith is to be considered a professing Christian and should be baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit and be welcomed to partake of holy Christian fellowship and enjoy all the benefits of the visible professing church with the full expectation of loyal, faithful service to King Jesus even – and especially – when such service results in persecution and with the realization that such service can require the sacrifice of time, finances, reputation, family, employment, and even life itself.

    The Holy Bible teaches that some professing Christians are not and will never be true, regenerate, born-again believers. In fact the Bible clearly teaches that there have always been two streams of Christianity operating side by side. One is the broader professing visible church, and hidden within that broader visible church lays the church invisible, the true Body of Christ, the truly redeemed. This will not always be the case since the two will be separated at the final judgment when Christ returns to earth at His Second Advent.

    But until then in many – if not most – cases it’s impossible for men to tell which are which. In the parable of the wheat and the tares the Lord likens the tares to the children of the devil who have been sown among the children of God. Tares are also known as Bastard Wheat and this particular weed is indistinguishable from real wheat until harvest time. At harvest time real wheat will bear kernels for harvesting and bastard wheat will not since it’s only a weed. This is a beautiful and frightening example that should give all professing Christians a moment’s pause to “examine themselves to see if they’re in the faith” as commended by the Apostle Paul in 2 Cor. 13:15.

    The imagery of the false professing Christian fills the New Testament canon and serves as a stark warning to all those who would pretend to take up the cross without first counting the cost, because while the salvation is the free gift of God by grace through faith to those who will be saved, in truth it costs everything. It costs the believer all they have and it cost Jesus Christ His own perfect, sinless blood and His life.

    On the other hand Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses and other Christian cults reject the sufficiency of the Holy Bible outright and insist on extra-biblical, aberrant, heretical teachings from other “sacred texts” or “new light” from their own cult’s self-proclaimed “prophets”. These cultic revelations are invariably at odds with the historic, orthodox Christian faith. Therefore while such groups will often claim to be “true Christians” nothing could be further from the truth. They knowingly advocate for and subscribe to unbiblical, extra biblical deceptions. Why is this you might ask? It’s because they have been blinded by the devil and apart from the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit via the true Gospel of Jesus Christ they are and will remain damned. They are enamored with the religion of man and hate the simple truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

    Some of these cultists are merely deceived and are in need of pity and tenderness in order that they might be snatched from hell’s flames, but others are hardened and brazenly suppress the truth in unrighteousness compounding their sins and trespasses against the One True Living God. Steffie is an example of a hardened blasphemer and heretic who refuses correction preferring instead to flee from the light and hold fast to her own self-righteousness. She repeatedly makes appeals to the effect that she is a “good person” and has a “good heart” even when the Holy Bible explicitly says there is no such person in all of existence! Steffie desperately needs a new heart to be given by the Lord of Glory. She must repent of her wickedness and fall on her face before the One True Living God in order that out of his boundless mercy, pity and love He might forgive her sins and translate her from spiritual death unto spiritual life which is the miraculous work of God known as “being born-again”. But that very fact is too much for people like Steffie. They puff up at the notion of repentance and bristle when they are called wicked, sinful, vile wretches even though this is how God Himself describes the unregenerate. The One True Living God is angry with the wicked every day. He hates them with a perfect hatred. His love is reserved for His own and His wrath and indignation will be poured out on His enemies, which are those who have rejected His truth as personified in the Lord Jesus Christ and as singularly encapsulated in His unique testament, His ONLY Self-revelation which is commonly known as the Holy Bible.

    There are only two races or types of people on earth, the redeemed race and everyone else. The redeemed race belongs to God Almighty being purchased by the blood of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. The redeemed race is a group from every kingdom, tribe, tongue and nation that has been (or will be) miraculously translated from spiritual death unto spiritual life by God Himself, their names being found written in the Lamb’s Book of Life from the foundation of the world. These will in no wise be lost.

    Everyone else is damned to eternal destruction in hell fire forever and ever because of their unrepentant trespass and sin which thing is an abomination and an offense to The One True Living God Who is Holy, Holy, Holy! A Holy, Holy, Holy God is a Just God. A Just God must and will judge sin, trespass and transgression against His Divine Person. For the redeemed that judgment took place on the cross of Calvary, for everyone else that judgment will take place at the throne of God where they will be judged according to their works in the flesh, by which no man can be saved, and will be cast into the lake of fire where they will forever be burned and tormented without relief and without ceasing for all eternity.

    It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. (Heb. 10:31)

  192. Charles YOU ARE NOT THE JUDGE!!!!!!!!

    Why can you not understand this?

  193. Coram Deo

    Are you God? Do you have the right to judge others hearts?

    “I’m saved so I can judge everyone else and tell them they are going to hell.” Where is that scripture at? Can you PLEASE site it for me so I can look it up.

  194. Fran said

    Charles,

    I only posted the question because of all the going back and forth with Steff. For me there is no difference in the fate of Mormon claiming to be a christian, or a person of any denomination or non-denomination claiming to be a christian that is not a christian.

    The outcome will be the same for both. We know that Mormans aren’t christians because of their beliefs and teachings. Then we have those that are in the church, sitting right next to true christians, true believers, claiming to be christians,with all of the outward apperances that are no more christians than Mormons.

    Without going any further, I know you get my drift.

  195. Charles D. said

    I do and agree.

    I didn’t not know of the re-definition of words by Mormon though I suspected as much. Sometimes too much sweetness gets downright sickening; especially when it is followed by lies, and “poor little victim me!”

    Every since I read 186 I get this image of she demons who are knowingly lost and is intent on taking everyone they can with them. Their tools might be niceness, false-professions in Christ (our Christ), not theirs. It is one thing for a person to damn themselves and quite another thing to damn those who cannot make a decision for themselves.

    Be well my sister in Christ.

    Charles

  196. Fran said

    Coram Deo,

    I read the link that you had left. I totally agree, and agree with your reply to my question. Thanks for your reply. The outcome being the same for both groups is what I was getting at.

    You explained in detail, and someone is truely going to be blessed in reading your reponse.

  197. Charles D. said

    Steff says:
    “Charles YOU ARE NOT THE JUDGE!!!!!!!!Why can you not understand this?”

    To answer your question, I have no idea; maybe it’s something in the water. Most probably it is for the same reason you cannot understand that you are going to hell. Not only have I, but, almost every born again Christian that have cared to comment to you have explained in elegant detail that your belief is not of God, that Joseph Smith is not a prophet nor is he of God, that polygamy is a sin, always have been and ALWAYS WILL BE; THAT Moroni is not a known angel (save dropping the last vowel and you have Smith); that lightness and darkness cannot mix, that “sweetness, niceness, will not get you into heaven or provide you eternal salvation, and maybe for the same reason you simply cannot get that through your thick head. It is extremely frustrating even carrying on a dialogue with you.

    I stopped feeling sorry for you some time ago. But I pray for those in your life who may not have reached the age of accountability. Now that (and you’ve known for sometime), that Mormons and Christians have absolutely nothing in common, that Christians will not be unequally yoked; it is indeed suspicious as to why you would willingly continue to get your butt kicked from pillow to post. Sadist? I don’t know, but you do not, in deed cannot contribute a single thing to a debate/discussion about my Father God and my Savior, Jesus, the Christ.

    Please know that you, Diane, and the dark angels that are preserved until the Day of the Lord, bother me not in least when you speak to my spiritual sate of being and you cannot say a single thing without sinning yourselves. EXAMPLE:

    I have no proof whatsoever that you and Diane aren’t the anti-Christ and a female demon straight out of the pits of hell. I have never seen either of the two of you. You could have two horns each and be ugly as toads. I know nothing of your works or faith, except your actions at this site does precious little to refute any allegations that you both are evil. At a minimum you judge people (you’ve certainly judged me stated not who you think I am and have in effect assigned me to hell). Admittedly you are a little more up-front than Diane, at least you don’t hover over the site seeking whom to devour as she does, save every now and again, and she will do the sneak attack thing. Neither of you would know me if I were standing before you right now! You have never seen me, have no background info to speak of, and don’t know if I’m 6’2 or 7’10. My point is (and you agreed in full) Ms. Diane had the unmitigated gall to say “we don’t have to ask members of your church about you” I will tell you this one thing, those are not the words of a Christian, and if she’s not and doesn’t become one and repent, then she will most certainly burst hell wide-open, the same as yourself.

    And if all of the above were enough, if you look back over some of your previous comments, you lie like a K-Mart rug. You came (back) to this site lying and have done little else since that time.

    You should either get your act together, or, at least stop leading with your chin.

    Charles

  198. Coram Deo said

    steffielynn Says:
    January 27, 2008 at 10:26 pm
    Coram Deo

    Are you God? Do you have the right to judge others hearts?

    “I’m saved so I can judge everyone else and tell them they are going to hell.” Where is that scripture at? Can you PLEASE site it for me so I can look it up.

    Steffie,

    I’ll answer you point by point, but your problem is with the One True Living God, not with me. I’m His bond-servant speaking forth His truth according to His Word. You’ll need to take your issues up with Him.

    I am not God.

    As stated in my post above I cannot see who, within the professing church, is truly born-again and who is not, but outside the professing Church ALL are lost. This is a simple fact which is repeatedly testified to by the Holy Bible.

    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. (John 3:3)

    Would you say that you’re born again Steffie?

    With regard to your last comment you seem to be confused about “judging”. God is the Judge and His Word is crystal clear, all those who reject His Son are damned eternally. His Word is equally clear that all those who are outside His covenant, which covenant was purchased by Christ’s blood on the cross, are the children of the devil. And while we’re at let’s not let it escape our notice that you are guilty of judging. You judge yourself to be a “good person”. You judge yourself to “have a good heart”. You judge yourself that you “love your Heavenly Father”. On what basis do you make these judgments? What is your authority for making these judgments? It certainly can’t be the Word of God since His Word contradicts any statement that men or women are “good”, quite the opposite in fact.

    My judgment, like yours, is meaningless, but which of our judgments lines up with the Holy Bible? The Holy Bible claims to be God’s objective truth so surely we can trust it as our standard. If what I’m saying is from the Holy Bible, and if the Holy Bible is true, then you and everyone else who rejects God’s truth as contained singularly within the Holy Bible are guilty of rejecting the Son of the One True Living God and are in danger of hell fire.

    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? (1 Peter 4:17)

    Steffie you are full of self-righteous pride believing yourself to be “good enough” to please God when in fact only Jesus Christ was good enough to please God.

    The One True Living God’s requirement for acceptability is absolute perfection. Are you absolutely perfect Steffie? Have you ever sinned even once in your entire life? Of course the answer is yes and therefore you stand guilty and condemned before God Almighty. He will just as surely punish the sinner with a single seemingly insignificant sin with eternal damnation and torment just as surely as He will punish the worst most obscene and vilest sinner you can imagine who has piled up sins like a mountain reaching to heaven. This is because He is absolutely and infinitely Holy and every transgression against Him is infintely evil and abominable.

    Sin cannot abide in God’s presence and He will punish it to the uttermost. He is Holy, Holy, Holy and sinners are wicked, wicked, wicked. It’s because of His absolute perfection and holiness that He cannot and will not tolerate sin in His presence. This is the great dilemma of all mankind, that we have inherited sin from the first man Adam and we sin wonderfully. We sin as naturally as we breathe. It’s inescapable. And this is the great dilemma, the great question that only the Holy Bible answers adequately: How is sinful man justified before a Holy God?

    The answer? God Almighty stepped into the world and became the man Jesus Christ who lived a perfect, sinless life that fully pleased His Father and willingly died a horrible, cruel death, spilling His perfect, sinless blood and giving His life as a ransom that fully satisfied His Father’s Holy Wrath against sin for all those who would be saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone. It’s by His atonement and by His grace alone that any might stand justified, forgiven, and accepted before the One True Living God, the Infinite Creator and Judge of the Universe.

    Everyone else, being unrepentant rejecters of His Son and therefore rejecters of the grace He offers and paid for with His own blood are judged as God’s enemies who will find their place in the lake of fire that was prepared for Satan and his angels. This is the fate of the unredeemed. This is the promise of God.

    God’s mercy is extended to those Who are called by His Name, and He separates His people from the world, But God’s wrath is stored up for His enemies and if you are genuinely curious about wanting to see the scriptures relating to God’s sure and certain judgment of sin and the damnation of the unrepentant (God’s enemies) here are a few examples.

    And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. (Luke 16:22-24)

    And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. (James 3:6)

    And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
    (2 Peter 2:3-5)

    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. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (Revelation 20:12-14)

    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. I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. (John 5:28-30)

    And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Mark 16:15-16)

    And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thess. 2:11-12)

    Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away. So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 13:48-50)

  199. Charles D. said

    Fran:

    I know I was blessed by it and would like the link also. The response was so complete and left little to doubt.

    Eventually, I’m going to take some advice you gave me a while back: Let the “Book” do my battle. AFter all it is the offensive weapon prescibed. Now how could I top that? I can’t.

    Have a blessed one;

    Charles

  200. Coram Deo said

    steffielynn Says:
    January 27, 2008 at 10:26 pm
    Coram Deo

    Are you God? Do you have the right to judge others hearts?

    “I’m saved so I can judge everyone else and tell them they are going to hell.” Where is that scripture at? Can you PLEASE site it for me so I can look it up.

    Steffie,

    I’ll answer you point by point, but your problem is with the One True Living God, not with me. I’m His bond-servant speaking forth His truth according to His Word. You’ll need to take your issues up with Him.

    I am not God.

    As stated in my post above I cannot see who, within the professing church, is truly born-again and who is not, but outside the professing Church ALL are lost. This is a simple fact which is repeatedly testified to by the Holy Bible.

    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. (John 3:3)

    Would you say that you’re born again Steffie?

    With regard to your last comment you seem to be confused about “judging”. God is the Judge and His Word is crystal clear, all those who reject His Son are damned eternally. His Word is equally clear that all those who are outside His covenant, which covenant was purchased by Christ’s blood on the cross, are the children of the devil. And let’s also not forget that you are guilty of judging. You judge yourself to be a “good person”. You judge yourself to have “a good heart”. You judge yourself to “love your Heavenly Father”. By what standard do you make these judgments and by what authority? It can’t be the Holy Bible because the Holy Bible denies that men are capable of such things.

    My judgment, like yours, is meaningless unless it is based on objective truth. The Holy Bible is the only objective truth from God. Surely we can agree that our standard must be God’s objective truth. Therefore if what I’m saying is from the Holy Bible, and if the Holy Bible is true, then you and everyone else who rejects God’s truth as contained singularly within the Holy Bible are guilty of rejecting the Son of the One True Living God and are in danger of hell fire.

    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? (1 Peter 4:17)

    You are full of self-righteous pride believing yourself to be “good enough” to please God when in fact only Jesus Christ was good enough to please God.

    The One True Living God’s requirement for acceptability is absolute perfection. Are you absolutely perfect Steffie? Have you ever sinned even once in your entire life? Of course the answer is yes and therefore you stand guilty and condemned before God Almighty. He will just as surely punish the sinner with a single seemingly insignificant sin with eternal damnation and torment just as surely as He will punish the worst most obscene and vilest sinner you can imagine who has piled up sins like a mountain reaching to heaven.

    Sin cannot abide in God’s presence and He will punish it to the uttermost. He is Holy, Holy, Holy and sinners are wicked, wicked, wicked. It’s because of His absolute perfection and holiness that He cannot and will not tolerate sin in His presence. This is the great dilemma of all mankind, that we have inherited sin from the first man Adam and we sin wonderfully. We sin as naturally as we breathe. It’s inescapable. And this is the great dilemma, the great question that only the Holy Bible answers adequately: How is sinful man justified before a Holy God?

    The answer? God Almighty stepped into the world and became the man Jesus Christ who lived a perfect, sinless life that fully pleased His Father and willingly died a horrible, cruel death, spilling His perfect, sinless blood and giving His life as a ransom that fully satisfied His Father’s Holy Wrath against sin for all those who would be saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone. It’s by His atonement and by His grace alone that any might stand justified, forgiven, and accepted before the One True Living God, the Infinite Creator and Judge of the Universe.

    Everyone else, being unrepentant rejecters of His Son and therefore rejecters of the grace He offers and paid for with His own blood are judged as God’s enemies who will find their place in the lake of fire that was prepared for Satan and his angels. This is the fate of the unredeemed. This is the promise of God.

    God’s mercy is extended to those Who are called by His Name, and He separates His people from the world, But God’s wrath is stored up for His enemies and if you are genuinely curious about wanting to see the scriptures relating to God’s sure and certain judgment of sin and the damnation of the unrepentant (God’s enemies) here are a few examples.

    And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. (Luke 16:22-24)

    And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. (James 3:6)

    And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
    (2 Peter 2:3-5)

    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. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (Revelation 20:12-14)

    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. I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. (John 5:28-30)

    And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Mark 16:15-16)

    And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thess. 2:11-12)

    Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away. So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 13:48-50)

  201. Fran said

    Charles,

    There are times when we are provoked to the point of no return, but those are the times that we should keep quiet if we are not going to speak the word. Not our words but the written word. It’s not about us and we cannot let our feelings (emotions) dictate to us what should come out of our mouths. Resist the devil and he shall flee. He that is in me is greater than he that is in the world. No weapon formed against me shall prosper and every tongue that shall rise against me in judgement, Thou shall condemn. Speak the word, confess the word. Walk in the Spirit and not in the flesh.

    Don’t engage in nonsense with the adversary. He knows the scripture. He’s just counting on you not knowing or not using scripture, not knowing authority that you have in the Anoited One, Yeshua. That’s one of his old tricks of questioning you. Who made you judge, show me, what if, how,where etc. It’s at least a tatic to distract you and get you off, and out of the true written word of God.

    Ther will be more than Steff that will have a rude awakening whe Yeshusa returns. It’s sad but true.

  202. Charles to speak of women the way you do is discusting. Especially a kind grandmother. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    You are all sad sad people, and if YOU are the definition of “Christian” you are CORRECT, I am not the “Christian” that you speak of.

    YOU say I am going to hell. Well if YOUR heaven is filled with hateful, prideful, judgemental, jerks, then count me out, because I would rather go to hell with the kind loving Mormons, then to YOUR “heaven” with awful, hateful people like you.

  203. Job said

    steffielynn:

    The Bible speaks harshly against unbelievers using the strongest possible language. Women included. I can find some examples for you if you are interested or doubtful. A person can be a woman, a person can be a kind, a person can be a kind grandmother, a person can be a kind grandmother woman, but without Jesus Christ as your God and Savior that kind grandmother woman will still burn in the lake of fire for eternity. It is all about John 1:1, John 4:24, and John 14:6. Anyone lacking is in not in need of political correctness but Biblical correction in the strongest terms possible, especially if said person is familiar with the gospel.

  204. Fran said

    Charles,
    With comment #202 read, it’s a wrap. “You are all sad sad people,” “I would rather go to hell with the kind loving Mormons.”

    That lieing decietful spirit will be begging for heaven once it gets to hell. lol

    Like I said, that’s a wrap for me.

    Job; You are sweet.

  205. Karl said

    You are all either ignorant or willfully refuse to admit that outside the Catholic Church, there is no salvation. But then again, ignorance is always either a sin or the penalty of sin, according to St. Augustine, is a just cause of damnation.. It is saddening to see Protestants appealing to Scripture that they may more easily
    succeed in deluding themselves or deceiving the unwary.

    If one dies a Protestant, adhering to Protestantism up to the last moment, he is most assuredly damned. He will be forever deprived of heaven, and will never see God (Beatific Vision). Protestantism is an open and avowed revolt against The Church of God, a total rejection, in principle, of Christ and his authority, and therefore, of Christianity itself. Protestants exhibit in their lives no virtues of a supernatural order, or that transcend our natural light and strength. If they can be saved in their heresy, or apostasy, then the divine plan of salvation is false and delusive.

    Please Protestants meditate on this terrible Truth and make haste to be united to The Catholic Church, The Mystical Body of Christ, before the sun sets on you and it becomes too late. For there will be no dawn for He who departs this life separated from The Church of God.

  206. Charles D. said

    Morning Job, Fran, Fruitcake:

    I woke up to the news that Gordon Hinckly of the Mormon Church has died. In view of Karl’s comment 205

    “You are all either ignorant or willfully refuse to admit that outside the Catholic Church, there is no salvation. But then again, ignorance is always either a sin or the penalty of sin, according to St. Augustine, is a just cause of damnation..”

    I think he and Steff will take up the remainder of thread, so, there little need for me to add to their current and future woes.

    Pray for the unbelievers, that they may repent;

    Charles

  207. Charles said

    Steff

    To understand this, please turn in a Bible to Job 1:8 where it is written, “And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job…..?

    Have you noticed my Sister Fran and my Brothers Job (especially 163) and Coram Deo, both rebuked, corrected and edified me; but in a Christian way, but not ripping my flesh as you wanted someone to do by your comments in 160? Note particularly how Fran in a kind gentle way, also, reminded me how to deal with unbelievers, using only the Word? I am a better person and Christian for it. I allowed you and Diane to reduce me to wallowing in the mire where you feel more comfortable and you reside there. I hope to be stronger in the future and not trot out the pearls God has given all Christians before the likes of swine as the Bible instructs.

    You, upon returning to this site swore up and down that IC was wrong and that that you did not and do not lie. Since that time, I have found that you lie with such ease, that sometimes you lie without even noticing. You say things you really don’t mean, things that the average Christian would not even consider saying as you do below:
    [“I am Mormon, I am a good loving person, I love my Heavenly Father and My Savior Jesus Christ. Nothing you can say or do can EVER change that.” ]
    But then you changed it (lied) with your comment, asking to be counted out and that you would rather go to hell. Well, I don’t know why you choose to further condemn yourself, but you are going to get your wish:

    [“YOU say I am going to hell. Well if YOUR heaven is filled with hateful, prideful, judgemental, jerks, then count me out, because I would rather go to hell with the kind loving Mormons,…” ]

    Speaking of Diane, you wrote that: “She is strong and brave because she went on a site where she knew she would be put down and called ugly things, and she spoke up anyways.” And “Charles to speak of women the way you do is discusting. Especially a kind grandmother. You should be ashamed of yourself.”

    I am neither ashamed nor do I retract a single syllable. You are a respecter of persons which is a sin (when you can use it and them) and you castigate others in spite of your sweet and nice self. Were I a great-grand father (which you haven’t a clue whether I am or not, would that fact merit me an exemption, however harsh I might have spoken to Diane? Furthermore, other than in this instance, point me to a SINGLE instance where Diane was either “put down and called ugly things” as you have very wrongfully alleged? So Steff, what does that make you?

    I will no longer take the facade you present to the public as a true representation of you or what you admittedly are. To the extent that I can, if I cannot defeat your railing accusations with the “Word,” then I will probably let stand the falsity that you speak because anything built on a lie will crumble at your feet.

    Charles

  208. Pray for the unbelievers, that they may repent;

    Amen.

    And for now, consider Matthew 7:6 in their regard, because plenty effort has already been made to help them. We see that effort was roundly rejected by them.

    If they are the Lord’s, we will have to be patient and God will grant them repentance at the time He has determined.

  209. Karl said

    Hard times for Steffie……tehehehehehe

  210. Charles said

    Typical RCC response, however, you might not have felt it yet, buy it’s coming……! Be scared 😦

  211. Karl said

    Scared of what?

  212. Charles D. said

    For your soul; for your error in thinking that the RCC supercedes Christ. Certainly not of me, I’m pray for you and that he come to know the real Jesus, and Him crucified.

    Charles

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
%d bloggers like this: