The Roman Catholic Church

The Roman Catholic Church

*This is especially for many people proping up the Catholic Church as almost divine like Oil Empire praising the Pope in his condemnation of the Iraq War, etc. Orbiting the Roman Catholic Church are heresies and great suppertisions. The origin of the Catholic Church appears to be when Emperor Constantine created a state church 312 A.D. after his “conversion to Christianity.” By 606 A.D., the modern Papacy as you see it today was fully activated. Very few Christians expose its false doctrines since it’s composed over 1.1 billion individually globally.

People are also scared because of the backlash since Catholicism worldwide is extremely potent in the media, religious affairs intentionally, etc. Sometimes taking the unpopular course is the most courageous stance for to hate the world and go against the grain is a sign of being of God. Usually [it happened to me] when anyone legitimately layout bible verses and other evidence that contradict the precepts of Roman Catholicism, Catholics and pro-Papist Protestants will label you as an anti-Catholic bigot or a basher. The fact of the matter is that I hate the Catholic religion and never Catholics personally. Manifesting Roman Catholicism’s deceit show care and love for deluded Catholics not hatred.

There are numerous Catholics who are trying their best to find a real relationship with God, but God in Revelation is calling them to leave. It’s not necessary to be apart of a church incorporating falsehoods for so long then expecting it to reform. Some Catholic apologists attempt to discredit Bible-believers claiming that before Luther; only the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches existed.

This is flat out false for before the Reformation, Waldensians, Anabaptists, The Celtic Church, Benegarians, the Church of the East, independent groups, and other religious Christian churches existed from the time of the Apostles to 1519 as the remnant. God said he will preserve his church forever. Other Catholic apologists claim that Protestantism is flawed because it split into 25,000 to 30,000 different denominations.

Additionally, they view that Protestants exhibit so much disagreement, that no Protestant is apart of Christ’s church. Is this a just case? No, see there is basic unity among all Protestants and Baptists for we all agree on the Foundational doctrines of Christianity (This is what makes you a Christian like the Incarnation, the Atonement, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, Salvation by grace through faith alone, the authority of the Scriptures being infallible, etc.) All bible-believers subscribe to this and:

“Some things are negotiable. These include things such as the form of baptism, the kind of worship music, the form of church structure and organization, defining the relationship between free will and predestination, and eschatology (beliefs about what will happen during the End Times). These are important issues. They can affect the quality of a person's Christian life. But they do not determine whether or not a person is a Christian. These are areas in which Christians can agree to disagree. Differences among genuine Protestants occur in the second area, the negotiable items. They could be compared to flavors of ice cream. There are many kinds of ice cream, but they are all ice cream. They aren't pie, or cake, or salad. In real life, people know when they are eating ice cream, and when they are eating something else.

Some Catholic apologists say that there are 30,000 different Protestant denominations. This is not true. Dr. Eric Svendsen has made an in-depth study of this claim. There is no valid foundation for it. His book "On This Slippery Rock" has a chapter about it, which you can read on-line. Dr. Svendsen also has an on-line article about diversity in Catholic beliefs. [Note 2 gives addresses.]… Let's compare this to something in everyday life. There is a huge difference between cats and dogs and horses. Now if you narrow it down to dogs, there are many different varieties. And within each variety, there are subgroups. For example, there are different kinds of collies and different kinds of poodles.

Catholic apologists act as if differences in Protestant churches are like the huge differences between cats and horses and birds and dogs. In reality, they are like the differences between different kinds of dogs (variations in the same kind of thing.) Often, they are like the differences between different kinds of poodles or different kinds of collies (small variations in things which are essentially the same)…” (From www.jesus-is-lord.com/spiritof.htm#ch11 “The Spirit of Roman Catholicism What Lies Behind the Modern Public Image?” by Mary Collins in 2002)

It’s time to further explain Dr. Svendsen’s “On This Slippery Rock” which refutes the 30,000 Protestant demoninations claim more elaborately. Svendsen’s work has found according to Barret’s research that there are 8,196 denominations of Protestants and 223 denominations of Catholics (which Barret broke down into 2,942 Catholic separate denominations in just 1970with 3,294 Protestant denominations in the same year). Barrett also unified many names of the same Protestant group into denominations even if there are no theological differences between them.

Not to mention that there are only about less than 2 dozen main Protestant groups not 30,000. Catholicism itself are in numerous divisions like Catholic feminists, (nuns, priests, and historians who openly defy the Pope, Liberation theology Catholics, Catholic Pentecostals, Christo-Pagans [Latin American Catholic influenced by folk Catholicism with Amerindian paganism], and Evangelical Catholics. I forgot about the Spiritist Cathlics, moderates, conservatives, traditionalists, Sedevacantists, and caretaria Catholics. No Catholic apologist mentions this at all. What is the reason why Catholicism isn’t Christian?

Basically, Roman Catholicsim acquires a false base of authority which are the Pope and its tradition. Also, it teaches the wrong way of salvation. It emphasis is misplaced in the 7 sacraments to be saved instead of Christ’s blood alone. Its acceptance of Christ’s divinity is accurate, but it believes that an object transforms into God plus Christ’s death wasn’t enough for atonement. It also gives unnecessary adulation to Mary plus adds false dogma as integral of its creed like: the infallibility of the Pope in 1870, Scapular in 1521, purgatory proclaimed as a tenet in 1439, etc. You can copy this expose to assit Catholics to leave that church and believe on real concepts.

Catholicism (like Masonry) is one of the easiest religions to refute, but its supporters are one of the thoughest to get through. I guess since they’ve been so conditioned (almost cultic) in following those systems. They are involved in the Inquistion, murder of Jews and real Christians, supporting the One World Religion, the international slave trade, pedophile preists, false doctrines, and even never excommunicated Adolf Hitler.

The Priesthood

*I have over 200 verses to refute Catholicism, but this is a simple summary to simply refuted their primary doctrines. Roman Catholicism institutes a select priesthood, but priests as clergy has no basis from scripture today. Only in the Old Law were priests instrumental in religious services as performing sacrifices, etc. Now in the New Testament, The Lord Jesus Christ is the only High Priest after the order of Melchizedek, his new title. Behold this 2 verses to prove that: “Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.” (Hebrews 6:20) and:

“But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building.” (Hebrews 9:11). Christ Jesus is the only mediator between God the Father and man (1 Timothy 2:5), yet priests in Catholicism have a special status as a mediator to “forgive” sins. The priesthood today is extended unto all believers (1 Peter 2:5-9, Revelation 1:6). The Levitical priesthood had the old law of using the blood of animals, but now they can never atone sin, but through the precious blood of Christ alone. Catholic priests are celibate, but mandatory celibacy enforced by anyone is forbidden and a doctrine of devils. (1 Timothy 4:1-3). Elders, bishops, pastors are many titles of select clergy not priest plus even a bishop should have one wife in marriage. (1 Timothy 3:2-6).

The Papacy

The Papacy is a system whose head is the Pope and Catholics proclaim Peter as its first. According to Catholicism, Peter is the Rock, but throughout the OT and NT, Christ is the Rock and foundation not Peter: “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ” (1 Cor. 10:4), “For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 3:11), “As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.” (Romans 9:33)

Mt. 16:16-20 is the prime verse apologists use to justify Peter’s Papacy, but that isn’t the case. The Lord Jesus Christ said “thou art Peter [in Greek that’s Petros or a masculine word for small rock] and upon this rock [Petra, or a feminine Greek word for a large rock], I will build my church.” The Rock is Christ or his and the confession that built his church. Even John 1:42 gives the name of Cephas as meaning a stone. Cephas is Petros in Greek not Petra. Mt. 18:18 has the keys of heavens, but in the sense of opening the door of salvation to Israel first then the Gentiles, so all men can have a chance to enter in the kingdom of God. That power is also given to Christ’s apostles and disciples (John 20:23).

Let’s remember that the foundation of the apostles is connected to Christ and Christ is the head of the Church (Eph. 2:20, Col. 2:19) The Pope is proclaimed as “Holy Father”, but Holy Father is a name utilized for God alone and it’s blasphemy to call a man by God’s name. (John 7:11, Rev. 15:4, 1 Samuel 2:2). Christ forbids to call a man father in part of a spiritual teacher like a rabbi (Mt. 23:7-9). God tells us to address him not as father. Father is used in the Bible for human offspring or lineage, but not spiritual religious titles for clergy (2 Cor. 6:18, 1 Tim. 5:1, John 8:38-39).

Peter was never a Pope for Peter was married (Mt. 8:14, 15) while popes aren’t, Peter would never let a man bow before him (Acts 10:25, 26), yet people bow before Karol, and Peter never exhitied supremacy over the Church. James’ advice on the Jerusalem Council was followed not Peter’s (Acts 15:13-19), Paul rebuked Peter, and Christ exhorted the greatest to be a servant for all (Mark 9:33-35) with no special papal leadership given unto Peter. The concept of a pope yet along the word Peope is no where in the Bible. Pope comes from Papa, a title for pagan Roman Emperors. Christ is the only foundation indeed. (1 Cor. 3:10).

Mary

Mary is a great, brave woman, but she isn’t the Mother of God for God pre-existed Mary. Isaiah 43:10 quotes God as saying “Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.” God is from everlasting to everlasting and only Mary is the earthly mother of Jesus Christ not the mother of whole pre-existence. God has no mother. Mary does have sin for all humans including Mary are sinners, so it’s impossible for Mary to be without sin: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;” (Romans 3:23) and “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” (1 John 1:8). Romans 5:12 proves that more. Luke 1:28 is a verse Catholics use to justify her as sinless and superior to all women, but it only says that Mary is highly favored among women not above women or full of grace. Only God is full of Grace: “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” (John 1:14). Other people are bestowed graced, blessed, and favored as well not just Mary (Mt. 25:34, Eph. 1:6, Romans 6:15).

The Mass

“The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priest, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." In this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner." (#1367, p.381)

The tabernacle is to be situated "in church in a most worthy place with the greatest of honor. The dignity, placing, and security of the Eucharistic tabernacle should foster adoration before the Lord really present in the Blessed Sacrament of the altar." (#1183, p. 335).

This is transubstantiation or the belief that the bread and wine of the mass becomes the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ, but the appearance and texture of the bread and wine remain the same. That church gives their mass in an unbloodly manner, yet Christ had one bloodly sacrifice (Hebrew 9:22). In religious services, all believers are forbidden to eat blood, yet Romanism claims they have the same blood and body of Jesus Christ. (Acts 15:10, Acts 21:25) Eucharistic adoration violates the 2nd commandment since we are to never worship to bow religiously to anything, but only to God. The mass is just an object and isn’t God (Exodus 20:4-5) Communion is solely a remembrance and John 6 utilized metaphors to mention the method of salvation (Luke 22:19).

Throughout John 6, Christ present the belief that belief on him saved not eating his flesh. John 6:43-47, John 6:34-36, John 6:36-40 all show that eating physical bread will leave our body, but the internzlaing of him will lead to salvation. John 6:63 called the spirit of God which gives life not the flesh profiting nothing. The eating of Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood literally aren’t mentioned in John 6 for that will be cannibalism which is forbidden in the Bible. Christ ony has 2 comigs in his total physical form not multiple masses (1 Thes. 4:16). Christ’s sacfrice on the cross was an one-time event with no repeats in the mass. Even Paul said that Christ’s presence physically in communion is non-existent (1 Cor. 5:16) Christ is not contained in an Eucharistic temple (Acts 7:48-49). The mass decays, but Christ’s blood and body can’t (Pslam 16:10).

Sola Scriptura

The Scriptures are superior to tradition and here’s logic reasons how and why. The Word of God is a compass to a person’s spiritual hearth and one of the breaths that gives life to Christians. All scriptures is inspired and God’s word is place above his name not tradition: “But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works” (2 Timothy 3:14-17)

and

“I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name” (Pslam 138:2). Sola Scriptura means simply that using the Scriptures alone is sufficient enough to derive the decrees of God. You can be reassured with the scriptures (Acts 17:1-5).

Tradition is never given as much praise and magnification as the Bible has. Here’s what is Truth: “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” (John 17:17). The Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:38). In comparision, no tradition have been propelled on such a level as the scriptures have, therefore the scriptures are superior to tradition.

Christ in Matthew 15:1-3 condemned the Pharisees’ tradition since it was contrary to the Word of God: “Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?” If the scriptures were equal to tradition, then no tradition would be condemned, but some verse have degatory comments about some traditions.

Christ never condemned the Word of God at all. Therefore, tradition isn’t equal to the word of God. It is the word of God alone that is living and active: “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” (Hebrews 4:12).

Baptism/Confession

"The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation." (Pg. 352, #1257)

"The Church does not know of any other means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude..." (Pg. 352, #1257)

Actually, baptism is not necessary for salvation, but Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation. Baptismal regeneration not only originated from pagan religions, but has no basis in scripture for belief is required before baptism. (Acts 8:36-37) Salvation is done by confessing your sins to God and believe on Christ and his burial and resurrection. This is the prime verse for believers’ baptism. Only unbelief condemns you to hell (Mark 16:16). The blood of Christ cleanses all sins not baptismal water (Mt. 26:28, James 3:25). Paul didn’t even come to baptize, but to save souls without it (1 Cor. 1:14-17, Acts 8:34).

Christ didn’t baptize a soul except his disciples and he saved people (John 4:2). Baptism comes from the Greek word “baptize” meaning immersion not sprinkle. Peter gives the perfect definition of baptism as a good answer of good conscience toward God as a figure. (1 Peter 3:21) As for confession only God can forgive sins. (Mark 2:7, Acts 8: 22, Hebrews 4:16) not priests. James only mention to confess your faults one to each other never to confess your sins to a man and expect a man to forgive all of your sins. (James 5:16) The apostles solely had the power to allow the Holy Spirit to proclaim the forgiveness of sins (John 20:22-23). Even the thief on the cross died without baptism to be in heaven (Luke 23:43). Throughout the NT, the son of man (Christ) had the power to forgive sins. John 3:16 eloquently issues the real way to be saves. So, baptism is after salvation for Paul only baptized souls after they believed (Acts 8:36-37, Acts 10:30, 31, 33, Acts 18:8, Acts 2:4, Acts 8:12, Acts 8:13).

By TruthSeeker24 (Timothy)
March 22, 2005
12:26 pm. EST

SOLA SCRIPTURA
SOLA FIDE
SOLA GLORIA DEO
SOLA CHRISTO
SOLA GRATIA

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS
SEMPER LIBER

RESURRECTION

7 CITIES
NORFOLK
PORTSMOUTH
HAMPTON
SUFFOLK
NEWPORT NEWS
CHESAPEAKE
VIRGINIA BEACH


OTHERS:
POQUOSON
SMITHFIELD
SOUTHHAMPTON COUNTY
JAMESTOWN
YORKTOWN
SUSSEX
NORTHHAMTPON COUNTY
ISLE OF WRIGHT
WILLIAMSBURG
EASTERN SHORE
ALL OF NORTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA
LANCASTER

___________________


Papacy/Peter:

1). Acts 11:26/Acts 26:28, 1 Peter 4:16 Followers of Christ are called Christians not Catholics. The word “catholic” are not mentioned historically until the 100 Ad quote of Ignatius and Justin. They meant “catholic” as all believers universal not a subjected church to one city (Rome). There was no Pope or Papacy concept whatsoever in the early church. The first to use the word “pontifex” was Bishop Hygnius of Rome in 149 AD. And he didn’t recognize himself as Pope. Later Pope Leo I and Pope Damascus would make claims of universal primacy of Rome, but even in the 300’s and 400’s, many people dissented with that idea. The Papacy is therefore by gradual development and isn’t biblical whatsoever. In fact, there is no historical evidence whatsoever to prove Peter is the first bishop of Rome. Polycarp, Clement of Rome, Irenaeus, etc mentioned not one line of him being bishop of Rome. Only by Jerome’s literature do we see signs of people believing in the 25-year episcopate reign of Peter in Rome. Historically, Linus is the first bishop of Rome not Peter. Hippolytus and even Eusbeius mentioned Peter as dying in Rome, but Linus as the first bishop of Rome.
2). 1 John 2:26-27 You don’t need a church or men to interpret scripture for you.
3). Philippians 1:1 Throughout the NT, the early church composed of the offices of bishop (overseers), elders, and presbyter (terms used interchangeably to show the same office), deacons, and other stations without a Pope or Papacy.
4). Eph. 1:22-23 Christ is the head of all the church not Karol.
5). 1 Thes. 5:21 Individuals who are believers have a right to test the teachings of any church. God wants his people to check things out for themselves using Scripture as a yardstick. It keeps us mature, as Christians not swayed by false doctrine. The Papacy rarely has its believers to question their so-called “infallible” beliefs, decrees, bulls, etc.
6). 1 Cor. 10:4 The Rock was Christ (not Peter). Also see Ps. 94:22.
7). 1 Cor. 3:11 No other foundation exists but Christ. The Greek word for foundation in that verse is Themelios meaning of institution or system of truth or the foundation. Christ is the pure system and all order of the church originates from Jesus Christ not from the magisterium or any false Church. The foundation isn’t Peter or the church but God alone.
8). John 14:26, John 16:13, 1 Cor. 2:13 the Holy Spirit, not the magisterium of the Catholic Church will interpret scripture for God’s children and help them understand all things.
9). Romans 9:33 Christ is the foundation again. See also 2 Timothy 2:19 mentioning the foundation of God.
10). Matthew 18:18 The keys Christ gives to the disciples and apostles not Peter solely. The keys are used as a steward though.
11). Acts 8:14 Peter was sent by the other apostles along with John. If Peter were a Pope, wouldn’t he do the sending or travel without a proclamation from other Christians to adamantly do so.
12).Acts 13:9 Saul had a name change to Paul; just like Peter presenting even more equality between the 2.
13).Eph. 2:20 Christ is shown as the chief cornerstone. Also all the apostles are foundation stones of the church showing more equality. There are many instances of Rome being reminded that it wasn’t possessing full jurisdiction throughout the church. Here are a couple of examples of this:

A). In the 100’s Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus, rebuked Victor, bishop of Rome over the Easter issue. He said that “We ought to obey God rather than man” to bishop Victor. Also Polycarp, disciple of John couldn’t agree with Anicetus, bishop of Rome on the issue of Easter as well.
B). Cyprian rebukes Stephen, bishop of Rome in his Council of Carthage decree saying, “No man sits himself up as bishop of bishops (or Pope)”
C). Polycarp and Ignatius used the words Bishop or elder interchangeably and even used mentioned multiple bishops existing in one city and that in no way denote a Papacy.
D). Pope Damascus and Pope Leo I makes claims of being the only successor of Peter deriving solely from Rome, yet even in the 300’s and 400’s, many people denied that claim and even in the Council of Chalcedon in 451 recognized the equal standing between Rome and Constantinople. I’m not even mentioning the immoral conduct of many Popes during the Dark Ages.
E). Many early popes denied many Catholic doctrines like Gelasius denying the Assumption of Mary, etc. The consensus for a Papacy existing in 33 AD. or 100 AD. is a myth.
F). Many early Popes even denied papal infallibility. Popes Vigilinus, Innocent III, Clement Iv, Gregory IV, Adrian VI, and Paul IV all disclaimed the attribute of infallibility.
G). Hippolytus disagreed with Bishop Callistus I of Rome’s dealing with Modalist heretics of Sabellius. As a result, Hippolytus rebuked Callistus and Callistus ended ties with Hippolytus. Catholic apologists say he had a re-uniting period before Hippolytus’ death, but even with that there’s still one bishop of Rome disagreeing with one of the greatest early church leaders, which was Hippolytus, in that span of time. Some historians even call Hippolytus an anti-pope (popes didn’t exist in Hippolytus’ age.)
H). In 664 AD. at the Synod of Whitby, the Celtic Church and the Roman Catholic also couldn’t agree on the Easter issue and Papal supremacy. The Celtic Church with Columba, Patrick, Colman, Aidan, Columbanus, and other people existed before Roman Catholicism yet again. As centuries past, the Celtic Church was forced to Scotland, while the Catholics forcibly merged their religion on the people left behind.
I). The Catholic Church also didn’t have full jurisdiction on the Church of the East. The apostles Thomas, Jude, and Bartholomew founded the Church of the East. Later as centuries past, the Church of the East and the Nestorians creates an automous structure showing God’s word to the Eastern world. Jesuits by 1599 subjugated the whole Syrian, Eastern Church. The good news is that even today, there are independent bodies of the Eastern Church that aren’t under Catholic jurisdiction that exist even today.
J). By the 14th century the papacy had become a pawn of political power. The French forced the popes to move from Rome to Avignon in what has been called the Babylonian Captivity of the papacy from 1309 to 1377. Following this episode was the Great Western Schism (1378-1418), during which opposing popes tried to rule. This ended with the Council of Constance, which deposed the popes and named Martin V (reigned 1417-31) as pope. In that time span of the early 1400’s, 3 popes were trying to reign at the same time. This and other evidences give the Roman Catholic church in an inconsistent light.

14). 1 Peter 2:68 Jesus is the head of the corner, cornerstone, rock of offense (not Peter).
15).Acts 9:10-16 Jesus said he called Paul, not Peter to go before the Gentiles and preach the gospel also to the children of Israel. Peter preached to the Gentiles and Romans, but Paul was specifically called to preach to do this command.
16). 1 Timothy 4:1-4 Mandatory celibacy for the Pope is forbidden and is a doctrine of demons.
17). Isaiah 44:8 God is the only Rock, and there is no other. See also Isa. 8:14 saying God is a rock of offense.
18). Deut. 32:31 Rock is shown as describing God alone also mentioned in Pslam 18:2.
19). Mat. 21:42 The cornerstone is Christ and Also Acts 5:29 says, “We ought to obey God rather than man.” (Magisterium, councils, decrees, Popes, etc.)
20). 2 Cor. 2:11 Paul isn’t inferior to the other apostles, but equal. Equality of the apostles is definitely conceived. See also Gal. 1:12, 2:2-8.
21).Eph. 4:5 Christ is the one Lord to be acknowledged and also see Mt. 26:72-74 showing Peter denying the Lord. (Peter is just a normal sinner in need of salvation just like all people need salvation and equal to any other human being.) The Papal denotation of Peter is therefore unnecessary.
21). 1 Peter 5:1-4 I, your fellow presbyter (not being lords over God’s heritage). Papal subjection is void as a result. See also Isaiah 22:25. That verse mentioning the kings who had those keys was fallible and broke and fell. They temporary utilized the keys, but Christ eternally possesses the keys of David forever. See also Rev. 2:7, Rev. 1:8.
22). Heb. 13:20 Jesus is the great Shepherd of the sheep not the Pope.
23). Mt. 23:13, Luke 11:52, Rev. 9:1-2, Rev. 20:1-2 Other beings had keys to be used not Peter alone.
24). 1 Cor. 12:12-27 The members of the church are expressed by body parts, but Christ is its total, heavenly, and earthly head not Karol.
25).Mt. 16:23 Peter is called Satan by Christ showing his frailty and sinfulness devoid of Papal power. Popes are rarely rebuked in the Roman Catholic Church. In a manner of calling a Pope Satan by Catholic flock, Catholic believers can have a risk of being excommunicated, condemned as heretics, etc. by the intensity of it.
26). John 18:36 Christ’s kingdom isn’t of this world, yet the Pope claims to be a temporal monarch of Vatican City. (It’s in heaven not in the Vatican). See also Luke 17:20 proving that the kingdom of God is in heaven being spiritual. There is no earthly headquarters of the church ruled by a human vicar. Also see Exodus 17:6 calling God the Rock.
27). John 17:11 Holy Father is used for God the Father. It’s blasphemy to call a man by God’s name. See also Rev. 15:4 and 1 Sam. 2:2.
28). Acts 10:25-26 Peter refused Cornelius to bow to him, yet many popes are benefluented or bowed to by clergy and other people within the Roman Catholic Church. One example of this is new bishops in an ordination ceremony bowing before the Pope in St. Peter’s Basilica.
29). Heb. 7:26, Heb. 7:1-2, Rev. 1:5-6 Christ is the only King and High Priest. Christ paid taxes, yet the Pope is exempt from taxes. Christ is given a crown of thorns, but the Popes wear a triple crown (tiara). The contrasting actions of both individuals make the Papacy dissimilar to Christianity. In John 1:44, Gal. 2:9, 1 Cor. 9:5 Peter was not always mentioned first in the NT. In John he was named after Andrew, in Galatians, James is shown first, and in 1 Cor. He is named after the apostles, etc.
30). Rev. 3:7 The keys of David belong to Christ alone not Popes acting as supposed “successors”. See also 1 Peter 3:22 saying that Christ has full 100% authority over his church without Papal influence. In Matt. 23:10, Christ is the only Master with no Popes as masters.
31). 1 John 3:2 The Holy Spirit is our guide to bear witness to the Word of God not a pope, false church, church, or any anointed man. The Holy Spirit is enough for every single believer in Christ.
32). Mt. 20:25-26, Mark 10:42-43, and Luke 22:25-26 Servant hood is a Christian character and Popes are more in tuned with subjection plus a leadership, control-orientated influence exhibited to the followers of Romanism than servant hood.
33). Acts 15:1-22 The First Council of Jerusalem was presided over by James not Peter. In fact, Paul writes more NT books than Peter and explains the gospel more than Peter. Is Paul a Pope? No, just like Peter isn’t by tons of evidence. Also see Isaiah 42:8 that makes it’s clear that all glory is not to be given to any Pope, but God alone.
34). Mt. 28:18-20 All authority is given unto Christ and not given to Popes. In fact Catholicism had many schisms or divisions like a). Donatist (311 AD.), b). Orthodox (1054 AD.), Reformation (1517 AD.), Sedecavantists (1870 and 1965 AD.), etc
35). Galatians 2:11-14 Paul rebuked Peter for his actions (Popes are rarely rebuked today especially in the past (i.e. Bulls presented by Popes are almost impossible to rebuke. Also in history, cardinals, archbishops, or any other clergy rarely rebukes popes in Catholicism.)
36). Mt. 8:20 Christ has no place to rest his head in his first coming, yet Karol (the pope) lives in a place surrounded by wealth and pomp. Even Mt. 21:42 say that Jesus is the only Rock (stone, cornerstone).
37). Rev. 2:6-15 God dislikes the Nicolaitine spirit of extreme controlling hierarchal systems with that kind of clergy and laity similar to Romanism.
38). Acts 8:18-21 Peter would not take money, for not God would give freely. (It’s the opposite of Ropes giving and receiving tons of money by indulgences, etc) There is nothing wrong with being rich, but can the Vatican sacrifice pompous palaces in exchange to create some reasonable actions like reforming and revising their religion.
39). Acts 1:15-26 A group decision decided who were to be an apostle not Peter solely. (That isn’t Papal in most instances except in papal religious decrees or re-election of clergy).
40). 2 Samuel 22:32, Psalm 94:22, Psalm 18:31 God is the Rock not Peter.
41). Mt. 8:14, Luke 4:38, Mark 1:30, 1 Cor. 9:10 Peter has a wife (modern Popes don’t). Also see Galatians 2:1-9 saying that the apostles are called pillars recognizing their equality to each other.
42). Rev. 2:12-17 Christ condemned the Pergamos church era by adding pagan rituals of Balaam similar to the Papacy adding pagan rituals over the centuries. (i.e. Rosary, Eucharist, Confirmation, image veneration, etc.)
43). 1 Peter 5:1-2 Peter calls himself and elder (not head apostle or Pope) and also John is called “the elder” in 2 John 1.
44). 1 Peter 5:4 Christ is the Chief Shepherd only. See also Rev. 21:14making mention of the foundations of New Jerusalem being 12 named after the 12 apostles making more references of equality to all of the apostles. Also Acts 1:21-22 says that the apostles had no successors, for to succeed them, one had to be a witness to Christ’s resurrection.
45). Luke 22:24-26, Matthew 18:1 An argument occurs with the apostles about who was the greatest. (Peter didn’t expressively admit his supremacy to end the feud with the others, but Christ later called for servant-like statue among all apostles displaying even more equality.
46). John 10:11, 14-16 Jesus is the only good Shepherd. See also 2 Thes. 2:3-4. That verse says that one man like the Pope with so much exalting classifications even trying to call himself Vicar (substitute, or replacement of in Greek and Latin) Christ, which is supremely blasphemous, is like the Antichrist. Antichrist is divided into 1 prefix and 1 suffix, which are anti-, and -Christ making up just a word. Anti in Greek is Ante meaning substitute or in the place of. Add it together and Antichrist in Greek means someone who “tries” to substitute or take the place of Christ. Who is that individual? The Pope is an antichrist in that manner since he claims to be the representative of Christ and tries to takes Christ’s place (i.e. Pope Leo XIII in the l800’s said “We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” How obvious is that, but the Po pe is not the Antichrist of Revelation but like an antichrist who has blasphemous titles, false beliefs, etc. That real Antichrist according to the Bible and church leaders like Tertullian Justin Marytr, Hippolytus, etc believes it’s a man who will reign for 3 ½ yrs, etc.) Many of the Reformers called the Pope “The Antichrist” because of the great immorality and degenerate religion of Catholicism. The Pope isn’t the Antichrist because he is so blatant and the Bible says he will come as one man not many men. The Pope is most probably the False Prophet in the One World Religion system.
47). Acts 20:28 To feed the sheep is exhorted to all of the church not just Peter. See also Numbers 23:19 displaying that God alone is infallible in all judgments, decisions, etc. A Pope’s decrees are always subjected to God’s word. Many of the Papal decrees have error in it. (i.e. Bull Unum Sanctum of the 1302 by Pope Boniface VIII says every people must be subject to the Pope for salvation or the Syllabus of Errors in the 1800’s condemning Bible societies, religious freedom, and even democracy.)
48). Acts 6:1-4 The leadership of the church is automous (self-governing) under no denominational hierarchy. Also see 1 Peter 1:1 classifying himself as only an apostle (no bishop, Pope, or the head apostle).
49). John 1:42 Cephas means stone not Rock by Christ’s own words. See also Titus 1:5-9 showing that the human leader of any church is a Pastor or Bishop with deacons, etc not popes.
50). Timothy 3:15 The church is the pillar and ground of truth not the truth or the foundation. See also 1 Peter 2:4-8 presenting Jesus as the rock upon which the church is founded. Nowhere in the Bible would you find the Church called the Rock or the foundation but the pillar and ground of truth. God alone is the Rock and the unbreakable foundation.
51). Eph. 1:22-23/ Col. 1:18 The Papacy is forbidden and Christ receives all preeminence not Karol. Also see Romans 11:18-22 which Paul warned the church to be in faith or cut off being fallible, but Christ’s church will never let the gates of hell prevail over it.
52). Acts 14:27, 1 Cor. 16:9, 2 Cor 2:12 Doors are being opened by God using keys. (Not solely Peter can use keys as a steward.)
53). Mt. 23:9 Call no clergy Father in the spiritual term of the word for high religious significance within the church clergy. Therefore, it is forbidden to call a priest by that title as well. Father in the NT is only called for human offspring, lineage, or an important figure in the past at the OT. Certainly no clergy such as priests were called father in the NT.
54). Eph. 5:23-26 Christ is Head over a Pope being all-powerful and having full authority on heaven and on earth.
55). 3 John 9-11 Believers are subjected church-wise to church leaders as long as they’re in submission to God. Any contradicting church leader like a Pope is rejected. The church is therefore democratic and executive only in executing the word of God not legislative adding traditions that are contrary to God’s word. The church is special and important, but no church is above God’s word and any church that tries to contradict God’s word should be rejected and rebuked until the church changes, etc.
56). Mat. 10:16, Luke 10:3, Ezekiel 34:6, 1 Peter 2:25 Sheep are mentioned showing the faithful not necessarily showing clergy or pastors. (It includes all believers).
57). John 16:7-14, Mt. 16:18, Mt. 18:18, John 20:22,23, Matt. 28:18-20, Acts 1:8, 2:1-4 When reading those verses you can find that all apostles received the Holy Spirit, had the same authority, and all received the same commission. If all apostles had the same duties, that represents equality for all apostles. Nowhere in the Bible would you find Peter being called “Pontifex Maximus”, “Holy Father”, “Chief Apostle”, “Vicar of Christ”, “Pope”, etc. You can never deduce that from God’s word or in the early church, but you can find that in Catholicism as a product of gradual development and additions of tons of tradition. Roman Catholicism is an addition tradition submission religion. It’s nothing more or less.
58). Acts 11:1-30 The Church was situated in the early era of Christianity at Jerusalem and Antioch as it main headquarters not Rome. Even those 2 cities didn’t recognized themselves as being superior in religious jurisdiction to all other cities or areas at that time. Roman Catholicism believes that Rome was superior early on in papal primacy, but that isn’t the case. That’s because there was no Pope, papal primacy, cardinal, archbishops, etc even existed in Christianity in its early existence anyway.
59). Psalm 118:8 It is better to trust the Lord than to put confidence in man. (Catholic trusts the Pope to be infallible in faith and morals of his ex-cathedra declarations, etc.)

The Southern Baptist Church and Billy Graham

Southern Baptist Church

Fatuity flusters in the Southern Baptists, the largest Protestant denomination in America. I used to have great admiration for them until I figured their grave treasonous concessions they’ve done for years. The Southern Baptist Church has extra-church institutions and denominational structures yoking congregations today. The biblical church actually had totally autonomous congregations in no complexities. Denominational structures are just man-made with no biblical authority on anyone.

Their church is also ecumenical. It was only until 2004 when the SBC (Southern Baptist Church) ended ties with the World Baptist Alliance (almost as extreme as the NCC and the WCC). The SBC does align with the China Church Council. Council K. H. Ting (“Honorable” President) is a member and he believes in denying the infallibility of the Bible, denied the judgment of sinful people, loves liberation theology, and believes that the truth is found in all religions. What a lie since Christ perfectly said out of his mouth that I am the way, truth, and the life and no man comes to the Father, but by me.

The SBC has dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church and Catholic priests have spoken in SBC pulpits. Even the occult Promise Keepers are supported by the SBC with David Cloud recording proof of it. The Southern Baptist Church refuses to help Billy Graham repent of his blatant apostasy.

They allow deacons to have pastor powers which aren’t mentioned in the scriptures at all. They allow women to acquire leadership roles like Anne Graham Lotz [Billy Graham’s daughter] preaching at a Evangelism Conference in 1996. According to the Ohio Baptist Messenger at July 2003, Lotz preached in a Sunday morning worship service at June 15, 2003 sponsored by the Conference of Southern Baptist Evangelists. This is forbidden in 1 Timothy 2:12.

They embrace the charismatic movement. The Southern Baptist Church is even yoked with the Satanic Masonic Lodge and the Eastern Star. Sorry, I will have told God’s truth that Freemasonry is anti-biblical and wrong. In June 1992, a Southern Baptist annual conference was unsuccessful to root out Freemasonry out of the Convention. One of its chairmen, Ron Philips, lied and said that Masonry was compatible with Christianity. Constantly for years, me and scholars like Jack Harris displayed God’s truth of Freemasonry being evil.

Freemasonry is Satanic and wrong for its enforcing unbiblical oath, pagan symbolism, and evil philosophy making Freemasonry as not of God. The “Sovereign Grand Commander” Freemason said that “Southern Baptists have become the 1st Christian denomination that essentially blesses the Masonic Lodge.” (Christian News, November 20, 1993). My educated guess is that 40% of the church is infiltrated by the Freemasons.

They are nothing more than neo-evangelicals and won’t use biblical separation against apostate churches, the Masons, and the Catholics. David Cloud wrote about Dr. Godsey, from Southern Baptist University, attack on the Bible in 1996. As for me, I’m an independent fundamental Baptist in my religious beliefs, but if you follow the Word; it doesn’t matter what title you claim. A title is never more important than a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. www.overcomerministry.org/ Materials/books.html is a site showing the truth.

 

 

Billy Graham

Hoaxing injustice extends even unto Billy Graham. Billy Graham is not only an apostate, but a strong deception to lull unsuspecting Christians to the sleep of ecumenicalism and the One World Religion. Graham even said that Jesus Christ lied. Rather, Billy Graham lied not Jesus Christ. Ed Parker, who created the End times Deception site and a real fighter against the N.W.O., written extensively on Billy Graham with so much evidence that BGEA (Billy Graham Evangelistic Corporation) refused to sue him for defamation since he has the truth. Parker recorded Graham telling a Parade Magazine that:

“I fully adhere to the fundamental tenets of the Christian faith for myself and my ministry, but as an American, I respect other faiths to God.”

This is bunk since God said this “I am the way, the truth and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6).

Christ said blatantly that he’s the only path to God the Father. Graham is just wrong here and a liar. Graham’s own dogma is contrary to the Holy Scriptures. Graham isn’t sure of a literal Hell by his own words in the Time Magazine at the November 15, 1993 issue. He accepts infant baptism, he called homosexuality a sin, but claimed that people are born that way [proven by Dr. Cathy Burns’ book], and support abortion in cases of rape, incest, etc. Graham even actively agreed with the government policy of fighting in the Vietnam War. Graham praised the Catholic Church (like in their worship of Mary) for decades and won’t convert them to real Christianity.

There is no doubt that Billy Graham is a 33rd Degree Freemason. Jim Shaw, an ex-33rd Degree Freemason who turned into a believer in God, with Tom McKenney’s book The Deadly Deception rightfully exposed Freemasonry. In the book, Jim Shaw mentions his 33rd Degree initiation ceremony where Billy Graham was present. Graham could only been a Freemason since he witnessed Shaw’s initiation inside of a Temple. Even Dr. Robert Morey wrote a book on Freemasonry that he had the membership of Graham’s 33rd Freemasonry status in the membership file at the library of the House of the Temple (the headquarters of the Supreme Council of the 33rd Degree).

Now, Morey backtracked and said that librarians told him that the file existed without him examining it. Gram endorsed the Masonic DeMolay group for boys. Many people on his Billy Graham Evangelistic Association staff are Freemasons like William A. Watson (a member of the development of mind control participating in Masonic-run Baylor University), David M. McConnel, Arthur Lee Malory, etc. According to Ed Parker, BGEA said that they feel that Freemasonry is incompatible with Christianity, but BGEA allowed Graham to help his Brother 33rd Degree Freemasons Robert Schuller, Norman Vincent Peale, and Oral Roberts (all Illuminatus) to develop their “ministries.”

Ed Parker sums up his research proving that Graham is a Freemason as well:

“The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association has done it again! Billy has had his name removed from a Famous Freemason list done by a Masonic lodge once again. The good news is that Balaams Ass website copied a mirror of the Masonic site because Steve anticipated this move by the BGEA. The Louisiana Masonic Webpage has moved and is now located at www.la-mason.com/ This Masonic web page has gone through a major change and the front page no longer resembles the mirror copy that is posted at Balaams Ass Web Site…Compare their new EDITED Famous Freemason list located at www.la-mason.com/famous.htm With the Mirror copy located at www.balaams-ass.com/journ...aham23.htm He should be listed under 'Other Famous Masons' I also request you to go to Composite Lodge #595 Webpage and see Billy Graham listed as a Famous Freemason before this list gets changed….Famous Mason list at members.aol.com/composite5/famous.htm
Homepage at members.aol.com/composite5/lodge.htm
Witnesses please EMAIL me…” (From www.geocities.com/endtime...n/list.htm “Billy Graham on Famous Freemason List” by Ed Parker)

Only Masonic Shriner clowns performed at his 1993 Portland Crusade, so Graham loves Freemasonry. It’s a known fact that Illuminatus William Randolph Hearst propped up Billy Graham into prominence. Hearst was no only part of the Knights of Malta, but a member of the Bohemian Grove who said to puff Graham up in 1946. Hearst was an adulterer and promoted Satanic plus New Age book. He was never a Christian, but a pagan:

“…David Hill went on to try to expose the New World Order and lost (was murdered) his life just as he finished a manuscript exposing it. Even a well-informed Christian like David Hill, who tried to warn Billy Graham about the NWO, was unaware of the extent of the deception of the Illuminati’s mind control. David didn’t know about programmed multiples. David Hill, who was a high ranking Scottish Rite Freemason and an important Mafia figure before he came to Christ, had even been the go between for Billy Graham and Joe Banana, a Mafia kingpin. It was David Hill, who innocently believing in Billy Graham, arranged the meeting for the two men. David Hill knew that William Randolph Hearst was part of the Illuminati; He was part of the branch Illuminati -- at what could be termed the 6th degree. William Randolph Hearst was totally into paganism. That is very obvious by a tour of his mansion in California which has been turned into a museum. It was William Randolph Hearst who financed the first three years of Billy Graham’s Crusades…” (From www.geocities.com/lord_vi...graham.htm “The Deception of Billy Graham, a Mind Control Front by Fritz Springmeier and others)

Henry Luce co-founded Time Magazine and helped fund one of Graham’s first crusades in NYC. Luce promoted Graham in his Time Magazine as well. Luce was a friend of the infamous anti-Semitic bootlegger Joe Kennedy. Luce was a member of the Skulls and Bones, part of the CFR, and decorated by the House of Orange with the Orange-Nassau. Luce’s hence is an Illuminist.
PhD. Carol George’s “God’s Salesman”, Oxford Press, in 1992 recorded that in August 19, 1960, Graham a top secret meeting. It was with 25 chosen guests in Mintreaux, Switzerland and they talked about how to block the election of JFK.

Norman Vincent Peale was the most prominent guest and the men were embarrassed when they were exposed. This is strange isn’t it since John F. Kennedy was never a Freemason and the Freemasons would kill in him in the “Killing of the King” ritual and other occult symbolism.

Also, Graham has a tendency to praise so many apostates, elitists, heretics, false criminals, and false Christians, that it’s crazy. He called Paul Tillich a great theologian, yet Tillich denied the virgin birth and resurrection of Christ’s flesh. Graham claimed that Dag Hammarskjod acquires Christian principles, but he’s the 2nd Secretary General of the U.N., New Ager, socialist, and was key to building the mediation room where one world religion is advanced. Graham considered Bill Clinton a true Christian for more than 10 years.

Clinton is pro-abortion, pro-Playboy [in a 2000 issue of Playboy, he’s pictured with Hugh Hefner] Hefner is a cousin of Bush and Kerry. Clinton is pro-homosexual, liar under oath, and member of a number of Secret Societies with no repentance of that. Ruth Carter Stapleton (a New Ager), Senator Mark Hatfield (a 33rd Degree and promoter of the Declaration of Interdependence calling for one world government, wanted a nuclear freeze, pro-abortion, and in favor of using taxpayer money to fund the pornographic NEA), John Rockefeller, Senator Robert Byrd (33rd Degree Freemason and involved in Tavistock’s MK-Ultra Project Monarch), Jeanne Dixon, etc. are Billy Graham’s allies.

In 1992, Billy Graham said in his “Embrace America 2000” radio program that the U.S. must embrace the New World Order. According to the BGEA webpage, Billy Graham received the Torch of Liberty plague by the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith in 1969. The B’nai B’rith is a Masonic group that accepts Jewish people and it was invented in 1843 by German Jews headed by Henry Jones according to Edith Starr-Miller’s 1933 Occult Theocracy (she died for us to show us this information).

 

The torch of liberty is an occult system related to Lucifer and the occult sciences admitted by Dr. Cathy Burns, the occultist Schure, and even 33rd Degree Freemason and Satanist Manly Palmer Hall. Dr. Cathy Burns’ “Billy Graham and His Friends” is an excellent book focusing on Graham’s apostasy. Hundreds of endnotes and a detailed biography make the case for his heresies. In this era of wolves in sheep clothing, Christians’ antennae ought to be activated more than ever to save souls and warn God’s sheep.

By TruthSeeker24 (Timothy)
March 22, 2005
12:26 pm. EST

SOLA SCRIPTURA
SOLA FIDE
SOLA GLORIA DEO
SOLA CHRISTO
SOLA GRATIA

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS
SEMPER LIBER

RESURRECTION

7 CITIES
NORFOLK
PORTSMOUTH
HAMPTON
SUFFOLK
NEWPORT NEWS
CHESAPEAKE
VIRGINIA BEACH


OTHERS:
POQUOSON
SMITHFIELD
SOUTHHAMPTON COUNTY
JAMESTOWN
YORKTOWN
SUSSEX
NORTHHAMTPON COUNTY
ISLE OF WRIGHT
WILLIAMSBURG
EASTERN SHORE
ALL OF NORTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA
LANCASTER

Neo Con talking points and Refutations

Common Neo Con Talking Points

with Rebuttals

So much myth prevail that I had to respond to the Neo Cons. Here are the 5 most prominent falsehoods they parrot:

Neo Con Talking Point #1: George W. Bush never lied.

Rebuttal: Billions of people lied in their lifetimes. Lying isn’t a mere occurrence. So, it isn’t extremist at all to assume that George W. Bush lied before especially about Iraq. He definitely lied for example in July 14, 2003 in a Press Conference with UN. Secretary General Kofi Annan said that “We gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn’t let them in.” The truth is that UN inspectors searched Iraq for possible weapons violations from December 2002 to March 2003. Bush knew this because he allowed them in.

Bush spoke about the inspectors constantly before the invasion plus the inspectors went to previously off limits Presidential palaces for 4 full months. Bush also knew this because he told the inspectors to leave Iraq on March 17, 2003. Another was in 9/7/2002, when Bush claimed that a satellite photograph and a report by the U.N. atomic energy agency (IAEA) as evidence of Iraq’s renewed weapons program. They also claimed that a 1998 report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said that Saddam could be 6 months away from forming nuclear weapons. The truth is that the IAEA report Bush cited was done before the 1991 Gulf War and Bush lied.

The White House later admitted it was an 11-year report. On May 30, 2003, Bush said (recorded by Polish television after 2 tractor trailers alleged to have been designed for producing biological weapons) that:

“We found weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories…We found them.” The truth is that they were not WMDs, but trailers to produce balloons. On March 6, 2003, Bush said that Iraq was a direct threat to this country, which was a lie for he knew that if Iraq was a direct threat, Iran and North Korea would be an equal threat to America, but Iraq wasn’t. From saying we have darn good intelligence to the switching justifications for war; falsehoods are all over the Bush team.

Neo Con Talking Point #2: The United States government committed no terrorist actions similar to Muslim extremists.

Rebuttal: What a big, strong lie. The United States government is one of highest purveyor of violence in human history. The United States government was directly involved in the genocide of millions of Native Americans and condoned the terrorist slavery of African Americans. This is not to say that everyone in government is evil, but certain members of government are Satanic. America used imperialism and killed thousands of people in the Philippines, Hawaii, etc.

The U.S. government unjustly firebombed Hamburg, Dresden, and used atomic weapons in Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing 140,000+ people are also terrorism. Also over 45 million dead unborn babies are sanctioned by the U.S. in the illegal Roe v. Wade abortion on demand law at 1973 is terrorism. The CIA supported fascists and dictators who committed terrorist acts. This is more than enough fact to equate terrorism by the U.S. government for centuries are morally equivalent to the deeds of Muslim extremists.

Neo Con Talking Point #3: We must spread democracy in the Middle East and the world without people’s permission or by illegal, pre-emptive means. The Iraq War is also going extremely well.

Rebuttal: Our government doesn’t have a Constitutional or moral right to force regime chance throughout the world at all. War must only come by the U.S. declaring war. Also, America is a republic not a democracy since the U.S. has tons of people that can only be represented by elected officials so policies can be executed more thoroughly. [Plus there is no tyranny of the majority]. Bush is a hypocrite calling for freedom in Iraq, but not for the Congo, Sudan, China, etc. where millions of innocent people have died.

The neo-cons are right that every human being of every nation has the chance to have freedom and are capable to have freedom including the Iraqi people to form a viable Republic. What the neo-cons get wrong is the means to do in aggression of arms in a bad manner leading to a lower chance of freedom and hatred by the world. If democracies would spread across the world then it would be equated to mob rule. I have no problem with promoting a republican form of government in the world. Pre-emptive war, though, don’t hold water since other nations can strike us without us [claiming pre-emption] threatening them leading to ultimate chaos.

The Iraq war is a mess. Terrorist attacks keep occurring on a regular basis, Americans G.I.s plus Iraqi civilians have died as well in heavy numbers. The President is outlining no coherent policy to get us out of Iraq. The elections of America have enough problems and new information points that the January 30, 2005 Iraqi Election as fraudulent. All of the Iraqis didn’t know which candidates they could vote for. Bremer-appointed High Commission for Elections deciphered all of the candidates as well. In many areas there were blank ballots for pro-occupation candidates.

Plus, the heads of government will be selected since a 275 member council will be formed after the election without voter input. If real democracy is formed the Sunnis could be experience the tyranny of the majority by the Shia and Kurds. I don’t like what the Kurds and Shia experienced, but representative government is best not mob rule. Communication, reasonable negotiation, just war, and inspirations are the righteous cause not aggressive war mongering for the sake of expanding an empire. We can’t even find the missing $9 billion in Iraq.

Neo Con Talking Point #4: The Patriot Acts I and II don’t violate our civil liberties.

Rebuttal: The Patriot Act (instituted at October 26, 2001 and its whole title is Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act) is a destructive, illegal law signed by Bush.

Section 802 defines a domestic terrorist as “involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State” and includes “activities that appear to be intended…to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion.” These definitions of a terrorist are ambiguous and broad since even misdemeanor crimes like 2 people fighting in a party (an act dangerous to human life) or jaywalking can be construed as a terrorist act, which is ludicrous. Non-felonious crimes are considered terrorism.

Also, if someone tells government officials to reject the N.W.O. or to be voted out of office, it can be coined as “intimidation” therefore a “terrorist” action. Just witness Section 213.

It allows the state and federal government power to go into your house, take whatever they want, and not tell you about it all without a warrant. Section 215 gives law enforcement expanded power to look at library and bookstore records (violating the Fourth Amendment) plus preventing librarians and store workers from informing patrons of monitoring or information requests (violating the First Amendment). Texas House Representative Ron Paul told Insight Magazine that the whole Congress had no time to examine or debate it.
       
Paul also said that they were threatening them of becoming labeled as unpatriotic if they opposed the Patriot Act. There are some parts of it that can never be expired (no sunset provision). If that’s not bad enough, King George singed Patriot Act II upon December 13, 2003 burning the Bill of Rights and Constitution. Bush is trying to include Death Penalty provisions of the Patriot Act of federal crime which last more than a year in jail which is obviously wrong by this source:

“Following on the heels of President Bush's road trip to promote the controversial Patriot Act at events in Pennsylvania and New York, on April 21, 2004 a key House subcommittee considered a proposal to expand the Patriot Act's controversial definition of "terrorism" to provide a death penalty for any federal crime punishable by more than one year in prison if the crime was intended to influence government policy and results in death.” (From www.infowars.com/print/ps...enalty.htm )

Patriot II is 10 times worse than I. It eliminates nearly all personal freedoms. Section 501 calls an enemy combatant anyone who is called a terrorist from Section 802 of Patriot Act II therefore expanding its proper definition. 501 now gives the Justice Department the right to grab someone off the streets and thrown into jail not to be seen again if someone acts in unlawful acts according to Alex Jones.

Section 201 makes it illegal for any citizen or government member to release information on the incarceration or whereabouts of detainees, 201 also says that law enforcement don’t have to tell the press who they have arrested and never release their names. Section 301 and 316 creates a national DNA database for even suspected terrorists and anyone associated with terror groups and all criminals (plus those on probation).

Section 103 gives the federal government the right to make wartime martial law power domestically and internationally without Congress declaring war. According to Alex’s research, Section 123 tells the government that it is no longer necessary for warrants and uses a giant-dragnet sweep. The list goes on and one. This is tyrannical.

Neo Con Talking Point #5: Anyone who disagrees with the neo-cons is unpatriotic, not for the troops, etc.

Rebuttal: Throughout history, disagreements praised as honorable when utilized in the right format. It is more important to give accurate information about Iraq than sound bites favorable to one side or another. Something that’s the truth isn’t always positive. At many times, the truth hurts. To dissent with Iraq is never treasonous or disrespectful to the troops. Telling the troops the truth is one of the best means to give our love for them not shielding them from the facts on the insurgency, torture, the restriction of death benefits until recently, the elite founding Saddam for decades, etc.

By Timothy

February 16, 2005

The truth about Wesley Clark by me Timothy

Wesley Clark

This guy is something else. What a fake and I get uptight when I expose this coward. General Wesley Clark is indeed a war criminal. All of the rumors you’ve heard about this war criminal are true. When Michael Lehman (the Jewish Christian hero for the truth called Clark out about his war crimes, he refused to answer his questions. That should tell you something.)

The first thing is to explore his early life. Wesley Clark’s father was Benjamin Jacob Kanne who was a Jewish lawyer. Wesley Clark’s family last name is actually Norevovsky then changed to Kanne. Clark’s father and grandfather were Russian Jews.

In the late 1890’s, Jack Nerovovksy (Clark’s grandfather) left Russia because of the violent pogroms against Jews. According to the family, Jacob Nerovovsky found safety in Sw itzerland, found a false passport, and changed his last name to Kanne to immigrate to the U.S. His step-father Victor Clark never told Wesley of his background until Clark was in his 20’s and he embraced it.

Wesley Clark was born in December 23, 1944 at Chicago. At 4 years old, he was raised in Little Rock, Arkansas as a Southern Baptist (his mother is a Baptist). Clark is now converted to Roman Catholicism. By 1966, he graduated from West Point first in his class with degrees like Philosophy.

Wesley Clark is also a member of the Globalist Rhodes Scholar and the Council of Foreign Relations like his well-known friend Bill Clinton. He fought in the war of Vietnam and afterwards Clark received the Silver and Bronze Star at 1975-1976. Congressman Charlie Rangel of Harlem, New York (a supporter of the mandatory draft) supported Clark u ntil he quit.

One of his first war crimes was in the 1980’s. In that decade, Clark was head of a refugee camp in Miami (Krome) and Puerto Rico (Fort Allen).

These camps had Haitian refugees who were sprayed with highly toxic chemicals to help treat a strange condition called gyreaemastria or “a situation on which they developed full female breasts.” (Gen. Wesley Clark: War Criminal and Murderer: Don’t believe the hype by Mitch Cohen).

Wesley Clark could be involved in the attacks at Waco. I’ve found that out as early as March 2003. Consenting to U.S. military equipment usage and possibly heading the military strike at Waco basically outline his relation to the attacks at Waco The military equipment and personnel used at Waco all came from Fort Hood, Texas.

The commander of Fort Hood was General Wesley Clark from August 1992 to April 1994 (commander of the 1st Cavalry Division of the Army’s III Corps in Ft. Hood, TX). That alone presents Clark as the man who could of authorized and commenced the armored vehicles used in the raid, the siege, and the final assault.

Plus no military commander would just give equipment up for any reason willingly unless he or she consented to it. Therefore, Clark consented to the actions since it’s Clark’s men, his arms, and his show. Obviously this is a violation of Posse Commitatus since the U.S. government military equipment was utilized at Waco.

Counter Punch website proved that Texas governor Anne Richards consulted Clark’s #2 at Fort Hood. Also on April 14, 1993 final plans for Waco existed at the summit, and the:

“The tanks were from Fort Hood, where Wesley Clark was, in early 1993, commander of the Cavalry Division of the US Army's III Corps. In our last issue we cited a congressional report commissioned in the aftermath of Waco, which described how Texas governor Anne Richards had consulted with Clark's number two at Fort Hood. Then, on April 14, there was a summit at the Justice Department in Washington, where Attorney General Janet Reno, top Justice Department and FBI officials and two unnamed senior Army officers reviewed the final assault plan scheduled for April 19. The two Army officers at the Justice Department that day were Colonel Gerald Boykin, and his superior, Ge n. Peter J. Schoomaker, the head of Special Forces at Fort Bragg. “ (Waco Update: The Delta Force were There, edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair June 1, 1999 From www.counterpunch.org/waco2.html )

Clark was also made Commander of the U.S. Southern Command in Panama from June 1996 to July 1997 supporting the continued warfare against anti-oligarchic movements in Columbia, Peru, Guatemala, Mexico, and Bolivia.

After that, he became the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO and starts war crimes in Yugoslavia in 1999. Clark was in charge of the NATO forces and oversaw the planning of these missions. He defended all of these bombings, and was an integral part of the Clinton team’s “spin” operation in Yugoslavia.

He led a 78-day NATO air war on Yugoslavia illegally since it targeted civilian infrastructure. The bombings hit roads, bridges, factories, petrochemical plants, radio TV buildings, etc. Hundreds if not thousands died plus Human Rights Watch condemned this action. Clark worked with the terrorist KLA or Kosovo Liberation Army to kill Serbs basically using Milosevic (probably a terrorist) as an excuse to do it.

His aerial bombardment of Belgrade was the first of its kind since Adolf Hitler’s Luftwaffe came to European cities. There were little mass graves by the Serbs and this war on Serbs was for the sole purpose to promote the heroin/opium drug trade in Kosovo. U.S. Intelligence worked with the KLA and with al-Qeada who all participated in the Drug Trade around Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosovo. Look at this source:

“Half a decade later (after the 1980’s), General Wesley Clark was supreme NATO commander in Yugoslavia. He presided over the massive use of depleted uranium weapons there which poisoned Yugoslavia’s water supply and agriculture, leading to an extremely high rate of miscarriages and childhood cancers.” (Don’t believe the Hype, NYCIndymedia, by Mitch Cohen, Tuesday, September 16, 2003 from new.globalfreepress.com/a...=nocomment )

More testimony of Clark’s reckless activities is from Captain Martin de la Hoz, a Spanish pilot flying missions for NATO, who said that many times his supervising colonel protested to NATO about their bombing of non-military, civilian targets that:

“Once there was a coded order from the North American military that we should drop anti-personnel bombs over Pristina and Nis. All of the missions that we flew, all and each one, we plann ed in detail, including attacking planes, targets, and type of ammunition by the U.S. high ranking military authorities…They are destroying the country”, the Spanish F-18 pilot continued “bombing it with novel weapons, toxic nerve gases, surface mines dropped by parachute, bombs containing uranium, black napalm, sterilization chemical, spraying to poison crops, and weapons of which even we still know nothing about.” (Quoted in “Articulo 20”, a Spanish weekly newspaper, June 14, 1999).

Wesley Clark nearly had a shooting war with Russian peacekeeping troops in Kosovo. It was only by the intervention of the British government, Defense Secretary William Cohen, and the Joints Chairman General Hugh Shelton that prevented Clark from starting WWIII.

When Clark ordered British Lt. Michael Jackson to forcibly block Kosovo’s Pristina Airport to prevent Russian planes from landing, the Britain. Michael Jackson replied “Sir, I am not starting WWIII fo r you’re a__”

Jackson was backed up all the way to Number 10 Downing Street. Clark was forced to back down. Eventually Cohen fired Clark as NATO Commander 3 months before his term expired. Now in 2004, there are now photos of General Wesley Clark shaking hands with Ratko Mladic, a Serbian fugitive war crimes suspect.

This was obtained by Judical Watch from the National Defense University under the Freedom of the Information Act at www.judicialwatch.org/3546.shtml

Wesley Clark seems to be a neo-conservative part of the so-called New Democrats who’s ruled by the DLC (Democratic Leadership Council) with its main nurtures of Al From and Bruce Reed. Immediately after 9/11, Wesley Clark strongly gave praises to the Bush administration including Bush, Condy Rice, and Powell and then now he’s against them.

Weeks after the Iraq invasion, Clark supported it and now he opposes it showing signs again that he’s a flip-flopper. Plus Clark even admitted to Republicans Colorado Gov. Bill Owens and Marc Holtzman (now President of the University of Denver) that: “I would have been a Republican if Karl rove had returned my phone calls.”

Clark claimed that this comment was humorous, but Owens and Holtzman claimed that he was deadly serious. Wesley Clark just exploited the 2 parties and chooses the Democrats. Clark seems to dislike Karl Rove more than Bush since Karl Rove refused Clark to join the Bush team after 9/11.

At March 28, 2000, Wesley Clark, the U.S. General and NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, was crowned by the Queen and made Knight Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire. His oath was this:

Crown: Upon which sword do you wish to swear your Oath?
Candidate: Upon the sword of His Imperial Majesty (Knighted by the Queen)

The Knighthood is unconstitutional and against our national sovereignty. Wesley Clark’s allegiance is therefore more to Great Britain than to America.

Wesley Clark is also was an investment banker and joined Stephens Inc. as a consultant in July 2000. (He was named Managing Director to the Stephens Group Inc. [in Little Rock, Arkansas] from March 2001 through February 2003.

The head of Stephen Inc. was Jackson Stephens (one of the main financiers of Bill Clinton, Reagan, and Bush) Jackson Stephens was Jimmy Carter’s roommate at Annapolis for 6 years.

Stephens is involved in Harken Oil, BCCI, and the drug trade. Stephen also financed: “Waste Technologies Inc., hazardous waste incinerator in East Liverpool, Ohio (and attorney Hillary Rodham Clinton [flaming lesbian and Illuminati witch] helped file paperwork for it.)

In 1992, Clinton and Gore promised that this facility-built Ohio River flood plan, next to an elementary school, would not be opened if they won the election. It started up two months after they sworn in. For more on this broken promise see.” (From www.greenpeace,usa.org/uti)

Back in the 1995 Dayton Peace Accords, Fieth and Perle advised the Bosnian delegation to use the chief U.S. military negotiator as Wesley Clark. In Clark’s 2004 Presid ential campaign, he has the nerve and is lying when he says that he’s the “anti-war candidate.”

Tell that to Waco, Serbia, Kosovo, Haiti, Montenegro, Bolivia coca farmers, or Columbians feeding their families. Yet another connection is George Soros (a left wing globalist and a member of the Bilderberg Group). George Soros’ most influential institution is the International Crisis Group (ICG) founded at 1986.

Clark is one of its board members. The individuals who head it are from the very center of political and corporate power. Its board includes Zbigniew Brzezinski, Morton Abramowitz (former U.S. Assistant Security), Richard Nixon (whose dead), etc. Soros is also close to Henry Kissinger.

Wesley Clark is pro-globalization, pro-abortion (This is funny since he claims that he supports genocide against the unborn because it’s the law. Hey, slavery was legal once ago an d that doesn’t mean it’s right), anti-gun, and pro-Homeland SSecurity. Wesley Clark won the Oklahoma primary at February 2004.

Illuminati Satanist Madonna and filmmaker Michael Moore for some reason supported Wesley Clark. Clark is now dropped out and supports Kerry for President.

WAR CRIMES

Wesley Clark

General Wesley Clark is therefore exposed as a war criminal by Waco and Yugoslavia, have connections to Big Oil and evil corporations, has total allegiance to the Queen and Great Britain, and is a neo-con Trojan Horse for the New World Order.

By Timothy

SOLA SCRIPTURA
SOLA FIDE
SOLA GLORIA DEO
SOLA CHRISTO
SOLA GRATIA

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS
SEMPER LIBER

March 1, 2004
9:43 am. EST

The Bible on Mary

 

Catholicism Refuted by Bible Verses involving Mary

---

This is one of the most sensitive subjects involving Catholicism. I took special care and research in literally researching, writing by hand, typing everything on the computer, and showing it to you. This is over 30 verses strong and a good witnessing tool if you feel like bringing a Catholic to the Lord Jesus Christ in your time. It has rigid historical information as well. Enjoy Christians.


Mary:

1). John 2:4,19:26,Luke 11:27-28 Christ either called Mary woman or nothing at all instead of Mother of God. If Mary wasn’t called Mother of God in the Bible or the Early Church for more than 300 years, why is it necessary for Christian to call Mary by that name? You shouldn’t and I follow Christ’s example.
Matthew 13:55-56 /Mark 6:3 Mary’s children are shown (Sisters are mentioned in those verses. Sister in Greek coordance of the NT means blood relative sisters not cousins.)

2). Ps. 53:3 All humans including Mary are sinners except Christ who never exp erienced original sin by being divine.

3). Isaiah 43:10 No one pre-existed God and there is no mother of God. Also see Micah 5:2 showing the Messiah is from everlasting without a Mother since the Messiah is God. Almighty God doesn’t have a Mother. Before Mary, God the Father and God the Son already existed. Mary is just the mother of the earthly Jesus.

4). Luke 2:21-23 Mary received purification according to the Torah. If Mary is sinless from birth, why does she need purification for after childbirth? Mary is obviously a sinner.

5). Romans 8:34 Intercession is solely by Christ. Also see John 14:6 and 2 Timothy 2:4-6. There is no verse in the OT or NT for intercession by any other being but God not saints, Mary, etc.

6). 1 John 1:8-10 If you say a human (i.e. Mary) is without sin, you deceive yourself and are liars. Special devotion to Mary is therefore unnecessary because Mary is important, but she didn’t die on the cross for salvation, she didn’t sa ve all human’s sins, she didn’t defeat Satan, didn’t organize the Church. Christ accomplished these things alone without you, the apostles, anybody, or me. No man is sinless so logically to exalt a human being like that is unbiblical.

7). Romans 3:23/ Romans 5:12/ 1 Cor. 15:22/ Romans 3:10 All sin comes to all men (including Mary) by Adam’s fall. No one is sinless no not one except Christ (God). There is no exception for Mary since all men are mentioned or all human beings.

. Job 141:1-4, Job 25:4, Job 15:11-17 Explicit confirmation of original sin (Mary is included since she was born of a sinful woman).

9). Mt. 1:24-25 Virginity of Mary ends after Christ. The word “knew” in the passage is the Greek word “Ginosko” which means to have sexual relations.

That verse alone erases any belief or idea that Mary was a virgin all of her life. So in the context, after Christ’s incarnation on planet Earth, it’s very possible for Mary and Joseph to have sexual relations and conceive children. Also, the word “firstborn” in the passage in the Greek is “Prototokos” meaning firstborn before others and head of the family.

The word firstborn can mean that Jesus wasn’t the only child, because why wouldn’t there be also an only child of Mary mentioned in the Bible instead of firstborn of Mary if Mary was truly conceived no other children but Christ? The reason is that Jesus Christ has half-brothers (brothers) and half-sisters (sisters) that were younger than Him, for he was the firstborn. There is also no mention of Joseph having children before being married to Mary. This is also against what the Bible says about Jesus. (Since firstborn is mentioned it’s possible children can be conceived by Mary and Joseph.)

10). Psalm 69:6-9 Messianic prophecy showing Christ’s half-brothers and sisters. In that tim e it literally describes David’s trials, but it does show signs of a prophetic significance because the Psalm mentions “they hate me without a cause” and “stranger among my brethren.” It alludes to Christ in the future because David is the lineage of Christ.

11). Ezekiel 18:4 Mary died since she was sinful. There is no early church historical or biblical evidence for the Assumption of Mary.

It wasn’t an official dogma of Catholicism until 1950 and that’s blaspheming Christ’s only ascension to heaven by his own power. Other people in the OT have ascended, but not by there own power. See also Psalm 148:4-13 saying that the Lord has glory and is exalted above heaven and Earth also praised above all. Giving glory to Mary is not necessary. The perpetual virginity and the assumption of Mary existed from apocryphal literature in the early centuries.

12). John 3:6 Mary is born of flesh and blood and is in need to be born again just like everyone else.

13). Romans 5:18 By one man (Adam) judgment came to all men (plus Mary), but by one man (Jesus Christ) human beings can have a chance to receive eternal life.

14). Galatians 1:18-19 The brother of Jesus is mentioned making Mary no an Ever virgin.

15). Hebrews 7:26 Christ only totally is undefiled and holy not Mary.

16). Romans 5:19 Solely one man (Jesus Christ) was sinless to save people. No other human but Christ who is man and God is involved with grace, salvation, mercy, and other spiritual items. Mary wasn’t involved with none of it. 0. Zilch. See also Gen. 3:15-16. That verse says if Mary is the woman of Rev. 12 as Catholics say, it describes her birth pains, which according to the Bible is a judgment on females by the fall making Mary a sinner.

17). Psalm 51:5/ Luke 1:30:46-47 Mary realized she was in need of a savior therefore being sinful and no human is sinless except Christ who is man and God. Only sinners need a savior. Christ is sinless and he Savior of all mankind. If Mary were without sin from birth onward, she wouldn’t need a savior since no sin would influence or stain her. Also see John 2:1-5.

1 1 John 2:1 The one advocate is Christ not Mary. See also John 2:1 calling Mary only the earthly mother of Jesus not the Mother of God.

19). Eph. 2:3/ Ps. 51:5 Even infants, including Mary inherit original sin, but infants are not accounted for sin though by not knowing right from wrong at birth. See Psalm 58:3 for more on this issue. Infants and young children automatically go to heaven if they die by that one exception.

20). St. John 1:14 Only God is full of grace and truth. Mary isn’t full of grace. Note: Mainly the Douay Rhiems Version (Catholic English Bible) shows full of grace in Luke, but most Bible versions show favored one or thou art highly favored instead. The wo rds of John mentioning full of grace for Christ in Greek is pleerees charitos. So either Mary or Christ possesses that attribute not both. Jesus has it solely by the evidence.

It’s very interesting to note that many pagan religions of Ancient America, Babylon, Egypt, China, Rome, Ephesus, etc had concept of the icon of the Mother and child long before Roman Catholicism’s existence. The utilization of her in a Mediatrix of Graces or Ever-Virgin came from many pagan religions. It’s typical to see it found in Roman Catholicism.

21). Luke 1:46-48 Note Mary says his name is Holy and his mercy is on those who fear Him (God). Notice she says God is Holy not herself and mentions mercy. God making Mary far from perfect only gives mercy to sinners (including Mary since Mary is a sinner as well). 2 Peter 2:22-23 says Christ alone has no sin. Giving Mary excelled glory, etc is not required for salvation neither does it effect your salvation, so why is it necessary to call he r sinless, etc.

22). Jeremiah 7:18/ Jeremiah 44:17 The Queen of Heaven concept is forbidden which is a nickname utilized about Mary in some Catholic circles.

23). Gen. 6:8/ Acts 6:8/ Eph. 1:6/ Mt. 25:34/ Ex. 33:12/ Ezra 9:8/ Ps. 84:11, 2 Cor. 9:8, Romans 6:15 Other people including Mary are bestowed grace or blessed no just Mary alone. The term chariots means bestowed grace used for Mary and other cases. Blessed in Greek is eulogia meaning “to be well spoken off” Does that denote perpetual virginity or sinlesness? Not likely in that circumstance.

24). Mt. 2:11,13, 14, 20,21 When Jesus and Mary are mentioned together, Jesus always acquires the greatest emphasis. Jesus not Mary should have your focus solely.

25). Ps. 84:11 All believers are given grace not just Mary representing the sinfulness of Mary. That statement proves equality of believers in God and God’s word. See also 2 Cor. 9:8 and Rom. 6:15. Ruth 3:13 say Ruth was given favor like a handmaid similar to Mary in Luke (More confirmation of equality between Ruth, Mary, and all believers in Christ).

26). Judges 5:24 Jael is blessed above women in which is similar to Mary being blessed among women. Mary is chosen in preference to all women not men. Grace shown is from the Greek word kecharitomene referring to God graced or given favor. Being grace is a result of being sinful (if someone is sinless, being given grace would be pointless since that person has no stain to merit grace) making Mary not sinless and validates the equality of all believers in Christ.

God’s preference to Mary was not because Mary is sinless, but to fulfill prophecy, etc. Mary was Jewish, a virgin, with the lineage of Levi (Judah-Abraham), and other reasons God choose her. It has nothing to do with superiority over all women. God chooses men and women for specific purposes, but it isn’t implied that they are better or greater than anyone else. Mary is the mother of the earthly Jesus and she’s very important not sinless. See also Acts 1:14 saying It’s the last time Mary is mentioned in scripture while she is in a prayer meeting with 120 disciples. None of them honored her; none of them reverence her, none of them prayed to or through her. God is no respecter of persons.

27). Luke 11:27-28 Blessed are people who follow Christ instead of Mary (Mary even admitted this truth). See also Mt. 12:48-50 where Jesus said whosoever shall do the will of my Father is like my brother, sister, and mother.

2 . Mt. 11:11 John the Baptist is given excelled mention, but he isn’t perfect or sinless just like Mary isn’t.

29). Luke 1:34 When the angel Gabriel first appeared to her and announced the savior would be conceived in her womb, she responded, “how can this be since I do not know a man.” Mary asked by the angel what manner of greeting is this? If she was sinless, certainly she would have known and understands why she had been selected for this honor she is sinful as a result of that and tons of other reasons.

Now in church history, the whole early church didn’t all believed in Immaculate Conception or the Assumption of Mary. Origen, Jovinus, Helvidus, Waldensians, Anabaptists, etc denied it. Polycarp, Ignatius, Barbanas, Papais, Polycrates, the apostles, and Jesus Christ never mentioned a word on such a heretical concept.

Tertullian in his Treatise on the Soul at Chapter 41 explicitly called God who is Christ as having no sin at all. Mary isn’t produced to be sinless or immaculate in that literature at all. Clement of Alexandria in his “The Instructor” at Book 1, Chapter 2 said that the Word is sinless without making any mention of Mary. Many of the apocryphal works and the Council of Ephesus (431 AD.) were the main factors in causing the exalted, unbiblical titles of Mary (i.e. “M other of God”) to be utilized.


One source from Ephaream from Syria (in the 300s-400s) is probably the main early church literature Papists use to “attempt” to promote the lie that Mary is an ever-virgin and sinless. Even Thomas Aquinas didn’t believe in Immaculate Conception (yet today, Catholic apologists are disputing that in theology research). The Franciscan friars in the 1300’s are the main individuals who are responsible for making that lie in Catholic doctrine making it mandatory for Catholics to follow.

Later, Catholicism used it as an article of their faith including the Assumption of Mary by the 1800’s. Gradual development caused the formation of those 2 doctrines. What Catholic apologists don’t tell you is that in 495 AD, Pope Gelasius issued a decree, which rejected the Assumption of Mary as heresy and its proponents as heretics.

In the sixth century, Pope Hormisdas also condemned as heretics those authors who taught against the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary. Even the early Catholic Church considered the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary as heresy. Wow. There are 2 so-called “infallible popes” declaring modern Catholic dogma a heresy. Also Pope Leo I, Pope Gelasius, and Pope Innocent III all denied that Mary was sinless only giving Christ the designation of being the immaculate lamb. Wow. How ironic. Now we see new claims of Catholic apologists.

Today, they claim that the Reformers believed Mary was sinless, etc. Now only some of the Reformers (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, and Billinger mainly) subscribed to that belief and not all. The Protestants Reformers weren’t perfect in every single way as history shows. Tyndale, Rogers, Wycliffe, and other Reformers showed no signs of believing in that at all. No individual or a movement account for Bible believers’ perception of God only God and his word. Catholic apologists today are more desperate than ever to lie about Mary and the true church.

30). Lu ke 2:47-52 Mary and Joseph didn’t understand Christ’s words. If Mary were sinless, she would easily understand Christ’s sayings since one who is sinless would know God’s ways and won’t need an explanation to concepts. It’s sin that corrupts one’s understanding of spiritual things or ideals.

31). Leviticus 20:27 Praying through or to a being in another dimension is necromancy and forbidden by God in the O.T. and in the N.T. since that’s moral law. When someone passes on after death no one (whether it be saved or unsaved people existing on earth) should communicate with that being. The only communicate with another being in another dimension is God who is infinite and exists in both realms. The only communication with another being in another dimension is God who is infinite and exists in both realms. God can easily forgive prayer and intercede with Mary or the “saints.” The denial of the invocation of the saints, Mary, etc is biblical.

32). Gen. 3:13-15 Now this is one prophecy Catholics use to validate Mary being sinless. Now in that verse, there is no explicit showing of Immaculate Conception let alone the sinlessness of Mary. That verse shows the seed of woman crushing the head of Satan. Mary is important, but not sinless or an ever virgin or sinless.

No human is sinless except Christ who is God and man. The head of the serpent is to be bruised by the seed of the woman, who is the Saviour, Jesus Christ and not crushed by the woman (Mary). You will also see that the bruise that the serpent will inflict is to his heel. The seed is of course masculine because of, our Saviour is Jesus Christ not Mary. Enmity is mentioned meaning eybah from Hebrew and it means hostility or hatred. Christ alone accomplished the crushing of Satan without Mary’s assistance at all. There is not one word in that verse or the Bible as a whole showing preservation of any human form sin or preserved to be sinless. (Only Christ as man and God is 100% purely sinless from everlasting to everlasting.)

33). John 2:2-4 Mary said “whatsoever he saith unto you do it.” Here is a verse that Mary commanded believers to follow Christ alone. The exalted titles of Mary or veneration or adoration of her is therefore very unnecessary because Christ is the being alone by all believers to follow and worship.

34). Matthew 1:20/ Luke 1:35 Jesus Christ is the only one who was not conceived by natural means, but by the Holy Spirit. 2 human parents, on the other hand, conceived Mary, and both parents were sinners making Mary a sinner for being a human being. No human other than Jesus Christ (who is human and divine) is sinless and you can find this directly and explicitly throughout the OT and NT.

35). Luke 1:41-45 In those verses, we see that Elisabeth greeting Mary and recognizing that she is blessed for being the mother of the Lord. But Elisabeth didn’t venerate or bowed before Mary neither did she give Mary any recognition of worship towards Mary. She only knew what was occurring. (Mary being involved in the incarnation of Christ was only a sinful vessel, etc. and that it was the Lord who should be worshipped and no other entity.)

By TruthSeeker

SOLA SCRIPTURA

SOLA FIDE

SOLA GLORIA DEO

SOLA GRATIA

SOLA CHRISTO


June 24, 2003
8:16 am. EST