Friday, June 5, 2009

The Trinity

Introduction:

What do I think of the Trinity? I believe in it since for years. Its biblical, divine, and totally true. Many heretics like Modalists, Oneness, Unitarians, and others deny it, but I will never. This is a simple, yet concise exposition to back up the honorable truth of the Trinity. I will divide this response into 3 reasons why I believe in the Trinity, which is a Philosophical Reason, a Biblical Reason, and a Historical Reason. Now it begins.

________________________________________________________________________

I. Philosophical Reason

First, many anti-Trinitarians have confusion over the real definiton of the Trinity, therefore that is one of the many reasons that they deny it as a biblical fact. The Trinity is a belief of one God not 3, but God makes manifest into 3 members or persons making God a complex, compound, yet unified being.



The Son, Father, and the Holy Spirit is God, the Son is not the Holy Spirit or the Father and likewise for the rest of the members. There are therefore 3 yet one in the Godhead, not 3 gods, but the Trinity exists as having one substance, power, nature, eternity, and essence.

This isnt too far fletched to believe since it expresses the distinction, yet the unity of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. In the sense of unity, there are cases where unity doesnt mean solitary oneness.


One example is man. Man has a mind, body, and spirit, yet man isnt a solitary being acquiring of one concept, but has compound unity within his or hers existence. Another is time made up o the past, present, and future, or physics consisting of matter, space, and motion.


The same goes for God though the later concepts deals with nature (Gods creation) and God is outlined in this way solely by the scriptures.


God is infinite and omnipotent and can do this because he is all powerful and the concepts of God being a compound being is bounded by the scriptures.

________________________________________________________________________

II. A Biblical Reason

The Trinity is all over the Bible. Just because the word Trinity is not mentioned in the Bible doesnt mean that the Trinity as a concept isnt maintained in the scripture. Oneness, communion, theology, essence, Incarnation, Sola Scriptura, Rule of Faith, Bible Law, Aramaic, etc. are literally mentioned in the Bible as words, but that doesnt mean they dont exist in the realm of Christendom or as concepts. The same goes for the Trinity.

The Godhead is found in the Bible and that means Trinity. To validate the Trinity as biblical, bible verses must be used to outline the main concepts of the Trinity which are:

_____________________________________________________________________

a). Distinctions or Differences Between the Father and the Son

The Father is not the Son, therefore the Trinity is validated. But to validate it, you need Sola Scriptura and its provided easily by these verses.

i). One of the best verses is from Mt. 3:13-17:

13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

In those verse the Father in audible voice says This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. The Father in that situation identifies Christ as his Son.


The Father didnt change his mode, use ventriloquism imitating Christ, but made manifest of a distinction by the communication going forth between 2 member therefore denoting compound unity.



Christ was in the flesh in that moment of time and in his human body cant create a voice from heaven saying he is the Son, because someone else is describing him which is the Father.

ii). 1 John 1:1-3:

"001:001 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
001:002 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)
001:003 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ."

In those verses, it described that the Father exists with the Son. If the Father was purely identical to the Son, the Bible would say that the Father is the Son.


No such verse exists no where in Gods word that the Father is the Son at all. One of the concepts of the Trinity is the denial of the Son being the Father and this verse simply outlines this.

iii). John 3:14-19:

14. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15. That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
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."


In those great verses, the Bible explicitly calls Christ alone who is begotten. Only the Son of God, not the Father or the Holy Spirit. This is true because the Bible says so therefore the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are Not Identical at all.



The Trinity is just a belief in one God with coequal, coeternal, distinct persons that share the nature of one God not 3 gods as the famous misconception maintains. Not to mention that Christ made a blatant difference between himself (Christ) and the Father by saying that the Father was greater than I signifying position only not power or essence.

_______________________________________________________________________


b). Plurality or Compound Unity of one God

This is a concept that exists in the OT especially. Genesis 1:1-4 is one of the easiest verses to show that. It reads 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was
upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the
face of the waters.
1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided
the light from the darkness. And v. 26 says that 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our
likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea,
and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all
the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the
earth.

God in those verses means Elohim and Elohim is a Hebrew plural noun making a possiblility of one unifed compound being. Thats evident by the prefix im presenting a mult-Personal God.


One the verse that says Let us create man in our own image has the similar point. If God was a solitary being he will say I instead of us but he said us [which is a plural pronoun in reference to himself not to angels] since Almighty God which is in heaven created the universe by himself and exists as a Trinity to do it. You can more at Genesis 3:22, Isaiah 6:8, etc.

ii). Deut. 6:4 shows that Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

and when that is literally translated it reads Shema Israel, Yehovah Elohim (Adonai) echad! One is translated as echad meaning a group united as one not a solitary one which would mean yachid in Hebrew. This source outlines this.

the only word that applies to God (Elohim) in the O.T., then this would be a death sentence of the Trinitarian believers. The word yachid means an absolute or solitary one. (Francis Brown, S. R. Drivr, and Charles Briggs, A Hebrew English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford, Charendon, 1966, pg. 402).

"Elohim conveys both the unity of the one God, and yet allows for the plurality of Divine Persons as expressed in the historical Christian doctrine of the Trinity. It is unique to monotheistic Israel and is not found in the language of any of her polytheistic, Semitic neighbors (Jack B. Scott, S.V. "elohim", in Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 2 vols:, Chicago, Moody Press, 1980, 1:44).

The unity in multiplicity is the essence of the Trinity or a plurality in one unity (God)

________________________________________________________________________

c). Distinctions between the 2 Members of the Trinity and the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit is very special here. Its unique. According to the Bible, the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son:

John 15:26-27
26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: 27 And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.

There is no time in the Bible where the Son, Father, and the Holy Spirit were identical or were the same person in the whole scriptures at all. Also in John 16:7, Christ referred to the future arrival of the Comforter to the church. The Comforter is the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit existed for all time, it didnt exist to the church in a great massive way to perform gifts, etc. yet. When Christ ascended into heaven, the Holy Spirit arrived in full power to the church at Pentecost. Logic and Gods word tells me that the Holy Spirit wasnt Christ, was not on the cross, etc since the Holy Spirit is invisible and cant be seen by our own physical eyes or mind.

________________________________________________________________________


III. A Historical Reason:

I know now tons and I do mean tons of Early Church History, so its like that. One of the greatest lies to confuse the Trinity is that ROMAN CATHOLICISM CREATED THE TRINITY AT THE NICENE COUNCIL AT 325 A.D. WHAT A GROSS LIFE AND FURTHER CAN BE THE TRUTH.


Pagan concepts did crept into the early church from the 100s 400s, but the Trinity is an established facts maintained by non-pagan Bible believing early Christians. Its fully outlined in the Holy Scriptures. The TRUTH IS THAT CHRISTIANS MENTIONED THE NAME TRINITY SINCE 180 A.D. AND CHRISTIANS BELIEVED IN THE CONCEPTS OF THE TRINITY SINCE THE TIME OF CHRIST.

The first man recorded written-wise who wrote the word Trinity was Theophilus of Antioch and he wont a pagan or a Catholic since Catholicism wasnt invented until 314 A.D. Theophilus said:

But the moon wanes monthly, and in a manner dies, being a type of man; then it is born again, and is crescent, for a pattern of the future resurrection. In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity,. of God, and His Word, and His wisdom (180 AD, Theophilus of Antioch Chapter XV. - Of the Fourth Day, To Autolycus 2:15)

The word was from the Greek Triados meaning Trinity and he usd it to describe God. Trinity can be used even before 180 A.D., but this is the earliest record so far before 180 A.D. Other early Christians like Justin Marytr, Ignatius [bishop of Antioch and brave Christian], Polycarp, Athenagarus, and others have shown quotes believing in distinction of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, denial of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as one person, and other points to show the Biblical Trinity in concept. Heres examples of that:

"...Our teacher of these things is Jesus Christ, who also was born for this purpose, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judaea, in the times of Tiberius Caesar; and that we reasonably worship Him, having learned that He is the Son of the true God Himself, and holding Him in the second place, and the prophetic Spirit in the third, we will prove. For they proclaim our madness to consist in this, that we give to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all; for they do not discern the mystery that is herein, to which, as we make it plain to you, we pray you to give heed" (Justin Martyr First Apology 13:5-6, Christians Serve God Rationally [A.D. 151]).

"For they speak of Christ, not that they may preach Christ, but that they may reject Christ; and they speak of the law, not that they may establish the law, but that they may proclaim things contrary to it. For they alienate Christ from the Father, and the law from Christ. They also calumniate His being born of the Virgin; they are ashamed of His cross; they deny His passion; and they do not believe His resurrection. They introduce God as a Being unknown; they suppose Christ to be unbegotten; and as to the Spirit, they do not admit that He exists. Some of them say that the Son is a mere man, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are but the same person, and that the creation is the work of God, not by Christ, but by some other strange power." (Ignatius, Epistle to the Trallians, Ch. VI).

"The Son of God is the Word of the Father in thought and actuality. By him and through him all things were made, the Father and the Son being one. Since the Son is in the Father and the Father is in the Son by the unity and power of the Spirit, the Mind and Word of the Father is the Son of God. And if, in your exceedingly great wisdom, it occurs to you to inquire what is meant by `the Son,' I will tell you briefly: He is the first- begotten of the Father, not as having been produced, for from the beginning God had the Word in himself, God being eternal mind and eternally rational, but as coming forth to be the model and energizing force of all material things" (Athenagoras, Plea for the Christians 10:2-4).

In fact the Non-Catholic St. Patrick believed in the Blessed holy Trinity by saying it in his Breastplate and Confession:

St. Patrick said "[T]here is no other God, nor has there been heretofore, nor will there be hereafter, except God the Father unbegotten, without beginning, from whom is all beginning, upholding all things, as we say, and his Son Jesus Christ, whom we likewise to confess to have always been with the Father--before the world's beginning . . . Jesus Christ is the Lord and God in whom we believe . . . and who has poured out on us abundantly the Holy Spirit . . . whom we confess and adore as one God in the Trinity of the Sacred Name" (Confession of St. Patrick 4).


447 AD St. Patrick "I bind to myself to day the strong power of an invocation of the Trinity--the faith of the Trinity in Unity, the Creator of the universe" (The Breastplate of St. Patrick 1).



All of these people arent heretics. Those denied the Trinity in the early church like Noetus, Sabellius, and others were the real pagan heretics and they were also rebuked by real Christians like Hippolytus. Hippolytus was a Bible believer and not a Papist who worshipped the Trinity by saying:

Hippolytus "As far as regards the power, therefore, God is one. But as far as regards the economy there is a threefold manifestation, as shall be proved afterwards when we give account of the true doctrine" (Against The Heresy Of One Noetus)

Hippolytus said:

"A man, therefore, even though he will it not, is compelled to acknowledge God the Father Almighty, and Christ Jesus the Son of God, who, being God, became man, to whom also the Father made all things subject, Himself excepted, and the Holy Spirit; and that these, therefore, are three. But if he desires to learn how it is shown still that there is one God, let him know that His power is one. As far as regards the power, therefore, God is one. But as far as regards the economy there is a threefold manifestation, as shall be proved afterwards when we give account of the true doctrine. In these things, however, which are thus set forth by us, we are at one. For there is one God in whom we must believe, but unoriginated, impassible, immortal, doing all things as He wills, in the way He wills, and when He wills." (Against The Heresy Of One Noetus)

Hippolytus also said that "She hath mingled her wine" in the bowl, by which is meant, that the Saviour, uniting his Godhead, like pure wine, with the flesh in the Virgin, was born of her at once God and man without confusion of the one in the other. "And she hath furnished her table:" that denotes the promised knowledge of the Holy Trinity." (Hippolytus on Prov 9:1, fragment, "Wisdom hath builded her house."

Note that Hippolytus in his history rebuked the pro-Modalist Roman Bishop Zephryrinus who supported the anti-Trinitarians in the 200s.



Independent groups like the Anabaptists, Donatists, Novatians [I have Trinitarian quotes from both Donatus and Novatian], Celtic Christians like St. Patrick, Columbanus, and Columba, Lollards, Waldensians, and others worshipped the Trinity or the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.


The Bible even commands you to baptize in all 3 members at Mt. 28:18-20:



18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
That pronounced the 3 members as one for baptism and 1 John 5:7:

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

I know that verse is controversial, but it was mentioned on all old English Bibles (i.e. Tyndale, Coverdale, Wycliffe, Great Bible, Geneva, Bishop, KJV, and all of the Protestant Reformers) for 600 years straight and came first writtenly discovered by Tertullian and Cyprian then Priscillan, Athanasius, Waldensian version ,etc.



Just because 1 John 5:7 exists on few manuscripts doesnt mean that its an added verse or a lying concept or a fraud. To deny the Trinity is to call Hippolytus, Tertullian, Ignatius, Polycarp, the Bible, and God himself a transformer being or a liar and that in it of itself is making a big mistake. It will make not that change or mistake ever.



Like always Christopher Lancaster, we Trinitarians are not wanting to paganize you but show you the truth and wake up to accept and worship the Blessed Trinity who is God Almighty.

I hope to God that you will do this.


By TruthSeeker24

SOLA SCRIPTURA
SOLA FIDE
SOLA GRATIA
SOLA CHRISTO
SOLA GLORIA DEO

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS.

SEPTEMBER 29, 2003

2: 24 pm. EST

My debate on Calvinism

http://thetruth81901.yuku.com/topic/879/t/Debate-with-Calvinists.html

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phantomtruth/message/784

The Lord's Supper

http://thetruth81901.yuku.com/topic/796/t/Redux-on-Early-Church-on-the-Lord-s-SUpper.html

Solomon's Temple

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phantomtruth/message/5837
*This is my response to Catholic #1 and his views. Enjoy.

Catholic #1: Hislop has long been rendered obsolete and Chick, well, what can you say about that.

Response: I dont consider Hislop and Jack Chick obsolete at all. Why do many people dislike Jack Chick? Its because hes been a soul winner for decades and never backed down from exposing the many Catholic superstitions that plague their religion like a virus.

Hislop conclusively proved that many of the infrastructures of the Catholic Church like the Papacy, nuns, mitre, mass, and other things have origins from the Mystery Religions of Egypt and Babylon not from the Bible. Jack Chick has proven to be a soul-winner for Christ and shown great exposes about Mormonism, Catholicism, Freemasonry, Jehovah Witnesses, Evolution, and Bible preservation for decades. Those things and what Hislop wrote are relevant today and are never obsolete.

Catholic #1: For info about chick and Hislop, look to catholic.com for their essays on them.

Response: Sorry, I rather look at www.piney.com/HislopTOC1.html and www.chick.com and see what both men have to say, not distortions. Chick have opposed Freemasonry, JWs, Islam, etc. and that should be commended. His opposition to the religion on Catholicism is founded on Scripture.

Catholic #1: Either/or arguments are a hallmark of Protestantism, though Jesus stated he was the foundation, yet we see in Rev ther are 12 foundations. The saints in heaven share in Jesus. Jesus is the head, we are his body, working together. Honoring Mary is the same as Jesus, as Jesus was a good Jew following the 10 commandments perfectly. Paul stated he suffered for the body, "lacking in Christ's iflictions" Is he saying Jesus didnt do enough? NO! he joins himself to Christ, as we all should do.

Response: This is a classic case of distortion. The Bible says that Christ is the foundation and the chief corner stone plus the Rock period (1 Corinthians 3:11, Ephesians 2:20, Romans 9:33, 1 Corinthians 10:4). The 12 foundations in Revelations refer to the New city of Jerusalem, not to the real and total indestructible foundation and Rock of the Lord Jesus Christ. Nice tactic in distorting the Scriptures to suit your agenda. I agree that the saints in Heaven live with Jesus and that Jesus is the head of the Church and believers are the body working together. On the other hand, there is no scriptural proof of a Pope, nuns, priests being a small number when God established the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:5, 1 Peter 2:9).

The Lord Jesus Christ is our only High Priest (Hebrews 7:26). There is nothing wrong with Honoring Mary, but I honor all believers equally not just Mary. Mary is a fallible, sinful woman since the Bible says that all men sinned. If you deny that all men have sinned before, you call the Bible a liar. The Catholic religion believes in venerating Mary and many Catholic documents cite Marian worship and some document classify Mary as a co-Mediatrix.

The Bible Says that Jesus Christ is the only Mediator between God and man plus we arent to worship nothing but God (1 Timothy 2:5, Hebrews 12:24, Exodus 34:14). It isnt necessarily for veneration since we respect Mary, but Christ should be our majority for all veneration and honor should be given to all believers (which makes up Mary) equally. Christ was God in the flesh and called Mary woman. I have no problem with man suffering problems after salvation, but suffering is never redemptive. Only God Almighty can redeem us by nothing of ourselves. There is nothing wrong with joining with Jesus Christ, but not following false doctrines like the existence of a Pope, nuns, scapular, rosary beads with repetitive prayer violating Gods word (Matthew 6:7), etc.

Catholic #1: It is not either/or.

Response: There is context in scripture and God said choose heaven or choose Hell. There is an either or in life.

Catholic #1: Any one that seriously believes in Chick, is rather sacary as all his sources 'are covered up" or "trust me"

Response: Jack Chick is right on Evolution, Freemasonry, JWs, Islam, etc. I trust him and his sources and his work are not covered up or intentionally false. Many of his sources include information involving Creation, music, and other issues, not just the Catholic Church. Hes very wide in his perspective.

Catholic #1: Rivera and Todd were documented criminals, these, Chick's sources.

Response: Chick uses more sources than Rivera and Todd. Chick uses sources from Intelligent design promoters, Bible scholars, researchers, etc. Watchman may call me a smearer and question Chick, but I wont. Rivera was a man who made mistakes, but his fundamental arguments of the corruption of the Catholic Church and the Jesuits are facts. Todd was a man who made mistakes as well, but he tried his best to outline the Satanism is prevalent in society and the Secret Societies power in America. That should be cherished not condemned.

Catholic #1: I have read Marcavages views on this site about Catholics. He spends more time, it seems fighting us than focusing on abortion, etc.

Response: Marcavages has a right to believe in what he wants about Catholics. Abortion is forever evil and murder, but ecumenical unity is wrong and shouldnt be used to fight against legitimate social ills at all. I dont follow ecumenicalism and Rome is surely promoting that gambit to con Bible-Believers to compromise their faith for submitting to the teachings of the Vatican. I will never submit to the Vatican, Freemasonry, or other false groups at all. God allowed me to witness the truth in front of my face and I will not deny God. Dissent with false doctrine is scriptural and not evil or a hindrance to people.

Catholic #1: His posts and info show he never really knew anything about Catholicism. Reading articles and statements do not make one a Catholic nor an expert. He clearly knows little about us. Further, the "ex" title is telling. Ex-smokers are some of the biggest anti-smoking nazi's around.

Response: Thats so funny that you call an ex-Catholic like Marcavages as not knowing anything about Catholicism. Catholicism is easy to understand. It believes that works save, that Mary is sinless, that the mass contains the body and blood of Jesus Christ in a circular wafer (used by the ancient Babylonian and Egyptian pagans), that purgatory is a real place, that the Pope is the Vicar of Christ when the Pope is never mentioned in the Bible and the Early Church condemned a bishop of bishops as Cyprian eloquently said in his works.

Catholic #1: Watchman,

I respect the fact that you are at least willing to look at both sides. By reviewing sites such as catholic .com, Catholic Apologetics International, Scripture Catholic, etc one should get a fair and balanced view of what we believe. Not some Chick-fantasy.

Response: Chick is not showing fantasy. Jack Chick is right that Roman Catholicism embraces purgatory, the Papacy, etc. Hes right that the Jesuits have been involved with negative activities before. Hes right that Freemasonry is wrong and occultic and hes right that God existed and that he created the heavens and the Earth. Jack Chick is right on a lot of issues.

Catholic #1: As I have said before, look at what we REALLY believe, not what someon with a clear grudge or slant has to say.

Response: I always know what Catholicism is all about by the Bible, Vatican II documents, early church quotes, more Catholic documents, and other information years ago. I dont have a grudge or slant.

Catholic #1: I have talked to Ralph Woodrow. He wrote a second book refuting, totally, Hislop's views in light on current archeology, etc.

Response: I havent heard of Ralph Woodrow. Hislops main premise that paganism influenced many of the doctrines of Romanism is a fact. I dont care how many books Woodrow right, since that cant be denied. Many scholars write literature blasting others opinion and that doesnt mean that the blaster is accurate at all.

Hislop believed that the cross was a satanic symbol!!

Response: The cross was a satanic symbol if you when a cross with equal sides on it. The cross in the form of a Tau is from heathen civilizations and thats proven by modern research, archaelogy, and history. Thats Hislops point. Thats not extremist for Christ rose from the dead. Having Christ on a cross around your neck is really sick for Christ is not on the cross but on the right hand of God the Father.

www.thewordsofeternallife.com/cross.html is a site with multiple sources proving the pagan origin of the cross.

Catholic #1: He is extremely eccentric

Response: He may be eccentric, but right on his arguments.

Catholic #1: I have read the KJV, comapring it to my 2 Catholic Bibles. NO disagreement. The original KJV had the so-call "apocrapha" books !!!!!

Response: Many scholars have pointed out the many disagreement between the Catholic Bible and KJV. The original KJV had apocrypha books originally because it was of a reference tool not because they were as equally accurate as the 66-book canon. The early Church like Jerome, Origen, Hilary, etc. rejected it. Jewish scholars like Josephus, The Council of Jamnia, and Philo, and others in the time of Christ and for hundreds of years after the death and resurrection of Jesus condemned the Apocrypha as being inaccurate. Thats a historical fact.

The Roman Catholic Church did not officially canonize the Apocrypha until the Council of Trent (1546 AD). Even King James and William Tyndale condemned the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha have many unscriptural precepts like prayers for the dead and sinless perfection (2 Maccabees 12:39-46), Salvation by Almsgiving (Ecclesiasticus 3:30), Purgatory (II Maccabees 12:39-45), the justification of suicide (II Maccabees 14:43-46), slavery and cruelty (Ecclesiasticus 33:24-28), and reincarnation (Wisdom of Solomon 8:19-20). Lying, assassination and magical incantations are also approved in the Apocrypha. Luther and Calvin regarded the Apocrypha as not inspired works of God. Luther called it solely for edification and Calvin rejected them out right. So, Bible-Believers rejected the Apocrypha from the beginning.

Catholic #1: TRy as I have, I could not find any validation of the man-made Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide or for some of you, once-saved-always-saved.

Response: There is tons of validation of Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide and other precepts. Sola Scriptura is the belief that the Scriptures alone are sufficient to help a believer to find all fundamental doctrines of Christianity. Sola Scriptura also means that the Bible is the supreme source of information for religious usage, the final court of appeal for doctrine, and sufficient guide for any religious walk. Those 3 signs can be easily derived from Gods word. Thats a fact since 2 Timothy 3:15-16 All Scripture is inspired. Also see Psalm 89:34 .Not even God would alter his word. 2 Peter 1:20-21 says his written word is inspired and not given by private inspiration. The prophecy came by holy men of God moved by the Holy Spirit.

The Scriptures arent equal to tradition since tradition has a tendency to be distorted over time, change, some tradition are unscriptural, and no one knows the total extent of authentic tradition. The Scriptures are totally preserved in 66 books. Christ condemned some of tradition, but Christ never condemned the Holy Scriptures. Since tradition varies over time and the Bible doesnt, the Bible is superior to all tradition. Sola Fide is that by grace alone God can save a soul and thats fact expressed explicitly by Paul and others in the NT. I dont believe in once saved always saved.

Catholic #1: BTW

For those of you that are conspiracy nuts, how do you know that Peroutka is really a protestant now, not a Catholic ? Paranoia eventually leads to trusting in nothing or no one.

Response: A Conspiracy is mentioned in the Bible (Ezekiel 22:25, Acts 23:13). Satan is in a conspiracy to ruin the world, but in the end; he will fail. Legitimate conspiracies ought to be praised not condemned like John Loftus, Eric Jon Phelps and other proving that the Vatican allowed Nazis war criminals to come to South America, U.S.A., and other places in the Vatican Ratline. Peroutka is an Arminian Christian. Theres no need for paranoia, but there isnt a need for doubting the New World Order plan as well.

Catholic #1: Christ founded a Church, not a Jesus-and-me-only ism. Read Paul's letters carefully.

Response: Christ founded a Church with Christ as its head, but not with Popes, nuns, monks, priests, etc. that existed from the obsolete Judaism or from pagan religion. Read Paul and Jesus words carefully. Christ wanted the church to be simplistic not massive expansive with pomp and public, unnecessary religious ceremonies as we see today not only in Catholicism but in Charismatic circles and apostate Protestants and apostate Baptist churches.

Catholic #1: The pagan fallacy, once taken its natural and full route, can invalidate all Christianity. There are several books that allege that Jewish and Christian beliefs are nothing more than pagan beliefs, mixed with Middle eastern religions and Greek.

Response: Satan using false faiths counterfeited items of authentic truth and some aspects of Christianity have roots in Judaism. On the other hand, Christianity is unique from all faith since its the only faith that believes that one man saved the sins of the word and that mankind cant be saved by works, but by grace through faith.

All pagan religions subscribe to the belief that works will save a man, but his works can never save a man. Also, Christianity is unique in saying that Jesus Christ is the only way to Heaven and Jesus saved all of the sins of the entire world of all time not Buddha, Muhammad, Hinduism, etc. Books existing slandering Christianity doesnt validate their opinions anyway. Theres books slandering Bible-Believers, but that doesnt make them factually true.

Catholic #1: The everything-we-dont-like-is-a-pagan-religion is poor on any archeology, history and religious thought.

Response: Wow, God said dont follow in the way of the heathen. The Bible says that dont follow sinful. Thats paganism. Archaeology, history, and religious thought have proven the pagan influences in Catholicism and you refuse to accept that. For example, the Popes mitre is from the pagan religions of Babylon and has no scriptural validation. Monks existed in pagan religions globally, but has no scriptural validation. The circular mass is circular and claims to have the blood and body of Christ and a circular wafer is found in many ancient pagan religions (proven by historian Wilkinson), but it has no scriptural validation.

The Pope itself has no scriptural validation and Popes existed in Babylon and many Roman Emperors were called Pappa. Paganism ought to be rejected as wrong not covered up. It's not about what we don't like, it's about what God doesn't like. God doesn't like repeating prayer, unscriptural doctrine, calling a man Holy Father, and other things. I follow God not men.

Catholic #1: Unlike Watchman, you all disagree with me based on your own misconceptions, not what I really bleieve, yet each one of you acts as your own "pope" in what is biblical and who is or isnt a Christian, based on your own narrow and undereducated mind set.

Response: I have no misconceptions about Catholicism. Watchman is Watchman and tried to call me a smearer when I exposed his pal Ronald Reagan (that fraud) and I know all about Catholic belief. I dont act as my own Pope since God gave us a mind to question things. God gave us a spirit to discern things and God gave us a soul so he could save us. Questioning and exposing false doctrines is not evil or a sin. I dont act as a Pope. The Pope lets people bow to him, the Pope claims that he is the Vicar of Christ, centuries ago many Pope claimed to be God or take the place of God which is blasphemous, and the Pope is called Holy Father, when only God is called Holy Father (John 17:11).

Catholic #1: Look at the sites I noted for a fair opinion.

I always looked at pro-Catholic sites before and my mind is made up to follow Gods word and not unscriptural addition tradition.

Catholic #1: I do thank you all, for your attacks have deepened my Catholic faith and I have gotten even depper into scripture!!! I also am a Promo Director now for a Catholic Apolgist group!!!

Response: I thank you for deepening my faith in Jesus Christ. Ive gotten deep in Scripture as well. It doesnt matter if you are a Promo Director for a Catholic Apologist group, since Ive debated racist, 7th Adventists, Oneness, Muslims, JWs, Freemasons, etc. before. This is nothing new.

Catholic #1: BTW- Bible Christian Society, tapes and CD's for $1, if you are interested in the Catholic view from a strict, Bible-only study! No Fathers, little to no Cathecis or Encyclicals

Response: Sorry, Im not interested.

Catholic #1: I am a believer. I find the Catholic faith is in complete harmony with the RSV, Douy-Rheims and KJV!

Response: You are living in false doctrine in the Catholic religion. It is in harmony with the RSV and Douy-Rheims, but not with the KJV that eloquently refutes much of Roman Catholic distortions of scripture.

Catholic #1: Thank you all for increasing my faith. I continually pray for you, that Satan not use you as a willing patsy for his will.

Response: Thank you for increasing my faith. I dont need prayer to follow Roman Catholicism. Satan is not using me as a patsy for his will. The Roman Catholic Church is false by the evidence.

Catholic #1: Watchman, I can at least respect you/I differences brother in Christ!!!!!

Response: What can I say. Watchman is Watchman. Hes pro-Confederacy and denies that Freemasonry influenced the Confederacy and Union side of the War. For example, the Southern Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite was based in Charleston, South Carolina and Albert Pike and many Confederate leaders were Masons just like General Grant. Anton Chaitkin documented a strong Masonry presence in the South as well. Watchman mocked me by questioning the existence of the Knights of the Golden Circle when both Union and Confederate leaders were members and scholars having proven their and the Jesuits involvement in the death of Abraham Lincoln before. He makes the mistake by claiming that I judge all Confederates as evil, which I dont.

I only judge the leadership of the Confederacy like Union as controlled by the Elite in the Civil War. Nothing more or less. I go on the Bush Revealed Forum and writes articles, but I dont agree with everything he believes in as well. He mocks the Jesuit conspiracy fact, but heres some facts that Watchman and Catholic #1 dont want you to know:

Fact: Jesuit priest Bernhard Staempfle helped Hitler write Mein Kampf proven by author Edmond Paris and Otto Strasser was one of the founders of the Nazi Party. Even Hitler said that he modeled the SS after the Jesuit Order.
Fact: Honorary 33rd Degree Freemason Ronald Reagan was cozy with Boston College President Jesuit J. Donald Monan. Reagan not only passed abortion in California in the 1960s and was anti-gun, but also allowed pro-abortion Supreme Court justice Sandra Day OConnor to exist and other bad political policies.
Fact: Hitler signed Concordant with Vatican Cardinal Pacelli in 1933 with the help of Knight of Malta Franz von Papen. Hitler was never excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church at all.
Fact:
Fact: Many Jesuits and the Vatican supported Latin American dictators to oppress the people there.
Fact: Jesuit Priest and 33rd Degree Freemason Joseph Rettinger create the powerful and sinister Bilderberger Group.
Fact: Jesuit priest William J. Fulco wrote the script for the unscriptural/occultic film of the Passion of the Christ.
Fact: Knight of Malta Dr.John J. DeGioia is a Georgetown/Jesuit trained person whos part of the Elite by being a member of the U.S. National Commission for UNESCO, Chair of its Education Committee, according to the webpage he "represents Georgetown" being a member of the World Economic Forum and the Council on Foreign Relations.
Fact: Jesuit Georgetown University trained Bill Clinton and he even went with Jesuit Richard McSorley on a trip to Olso, Norway since both opposed the Vietnam War. Clinton is obvious a person who is pro-abortion and even vetoes a ban on partial birth abortion when the majority of the American people opposed that type of abortion.

*Not to mention that the refuse to look at the Vaticans Secret Societies of the Opus Dei, Knights of Columbus, Knights of Malta, etc. I hope you convert to real Christianity Catholic #1.

By TruthSeeker24 (Timothy).


__________________________


My answer to Pastor Steve.


Pastor Steve: I read his post If I was a black man I would surely want to set the record straight as well, however I think Bill Cosby would agree with me and say you're wrong and I'm right. This isn't data from "white supremists". This is data from the FBI And other even more credible statistics, and it is not just a minor disappropriation.


Response: I know you read my post. I disagree with you on British Israelism for plenty of reasons and about the Jewish people for numerous reasons. I knew it had to come down to this situation indeed. I want the record straight and it's true that Bill Cosby and the "Rev." Jesse Lee Peterson would agree with you on some issues. I don't think that they would agree with you that blacks have no chance of being greatly intellectual gifted like me, that the real Jews are Anglo-Saxons whites being refuted by creditable theologians and historians before, or that blacks in general have a genetic pre-disposition for all crimes, which is a lie and you know it. That data was used by white supremacists like Jared Taylor and others. Also, many folks like Tim Wise have exposed the misinterpretation of the FBI data that the racist Taylor have utilized. My links expose them eloquently. Like I said before, there is disappropriation in some black people, but not all blacks are criminals nor genetically apt to commit violent crime. It's very hilarious that Bill Cosby have been neutral on racial issues for decades then goes around and starts bashing the poor. I hear nothing from Bill on real black history neither on the corrupt policies of the Bush administration.

Pastor Steve: Genes have to do with violent crime, you should open up your eyes. Genes have to do with gifts, and they should all live where God put them and not discriminate against their ethnic cultural heritage to force them to live in a situation God never intended.

Response: You're speaking a half-truth here. Genes are special and with characteristic for all mankind. You are right on that. On the otherhand, even the Human Genome Project cited that genes vary more within races than between. Genes can be a gift in many times. As for genes and crime, there is no conclusive evidence that violent crime is genetic. Many scientists have proposed a hypothesis in their research that genes may have a role in anti-social behavior, primarily among males. There is no conclusive evidence to denote that blacks are genetically more apt to be criminal. To believe that is not only racist, but pro-eugenics. As for living, any man has a right to live whereever they want to live in any nation. The law commands this and morality preaches this. You need to open your eyes on God's Word saying to treat your neighbor as yourself, love all men, and the house of the Lord is a place for all people.

Pastor Steve: An example of violence related to genes: An adult black male is 300 times more likely to commit murder than a white woman. Although adult black males of the age to commit crime make up 1.2 percent of the population, they commit 74% of ALL VIOLENT CRIME like RAPE AND MURDER. I'll let you read a multitude of other statistics at the link.

Response: This is no example, but your own view. I guess you love to try to denigrate black people. I will look into your rape view, but my intuition tells me that it's a product of a distorted stat, especially when you cite nothing about white male rape. The truth is that the majority of crime is committed by white males, not black people. In 2002, 29.3 million blacks lived in America of 12 and over. In 2002, there were 1.2 million violent crimes committed by blacks as recored in the Criminal Victimization , U.S. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2004, Tables 40 and 46. This is vastly lower than the claims of white racists. This is just 1.3% of the population of blacks in America. Therefore, it's false to say that 74% of all violent crime are committed by blacks. Also, the links that you use from from the 1990's when the crime rate was much higher than today. Now, the crime rates have decreased among all groups. From 1995-2000, blacks were 65 percent of racial and ethnic hate-crime victims, while whites were 21 percent of such victims. In 2001, there were approximately 4.6 times more white-on-black than black-on-white hate crimes. It's very ironic that you supposedly want racial peaceful co-existence, but won't discuss the disaproporationate levels of crimes among whites in serial killers, corporate fraud, imperialistic adventures, bringe drinking, alcohol related deaths, etc. There are a multitude of stats refuting the lies about black crime by folks like Tim Wise, so you can't intimidate me. Plus, most of your stats are from the mid-1990's and are outdated anyway.

Response: TruthSeeker says that many experts have found that poverty and education has to do with crime. They have been saying that for the last 100 years, and that's why we have given black's everything freely, including TRILLIONS of dollars worth of EDUCATION PROGRAMS and handouts. However, things still haven't changed because God gave gifts to every ethnic culture to live SEPARATELY from all other cultures.

Response: I've say that and that's true. People have said that for a long time, but it's a lie that in 100 years blacks have been given everythign freely. That's a lie for 100 years ago, we were under Jim Crow, many of us were lynch, we were discriminated against, we were suffered like crazy, and many of us died. Don't give me that freely nonesense. The vast majority of black people work in America and contributed greatly to this country. Money have been given to education programs and other things. Instead of citing the negative problems in the black community, why do you cite the positive results that we've achieved in decades. For example, the poverty rate for black children 41.5 percent in 1995 to 30.0 percent in 2001 (This stats is from the Heritage Foundation, not a left wing group at all). The black ownership rate among Blacks are in record highs. The Black drop out rate have decreased since 1972. Blacks have increased thier IQs drastically since 1990. A record number of black Phds, althetes, scholars, theologians, historians, speakers, and other leaders exist in this nations.

Real black history in Egypt, Nubia, Nok, parts of India and Asia, Europe, Songhai, Mali, Zimbabwe, Olmecs, etc. are being discovered all of the time. Bill Cosby and Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson haven't discussed that at all. I'm bringing it Steve. Some black people haven't recieved handouts, but fought for the ascendance to greatness. Also, Steve don't be hypocrite now. If all compensation-type assistance is invalid, you must condemn the G.I. bill, heritage decrees by the elite into universities, VA benefits, etc. since you can describe that as handouts as well. Not to mention that blacks on welfare have decreased for decades that you don't mention. Nice try Steve. Education programs have worked in many places. For example in Norfolk, VA (where it's 50% black) they were awarded the best urban education center in the country. Most black schools like Roberts Elementary have recieved great honors in their testing as well. Yes, black people have problems, but we aren't stationary in our disposition neither are all blacks criminals or intellectually inferior to white people at all. Blacks have shown that we can increase our intellectual prowess.

Get the record straight Steve. Things have changed in America for blacks. Many blacks are leaders, many blacks have given back to their community, many blacks are learning their true heritage, and many blacks are being smarter despite at first living in poverty. We need continued effort. Continued effort and education have made positive results. Just because problems persist, doesn't mean there is no hope or it's time to give up. Cowards give up. Men step up and continue to fight. The Bible says that believers of any color can unite. In Acts, the black man named Niger united in prayer with non-blacks. The Bible in Revelation have all people together praising the Lord, so don't bring up the segregation of believers nonesense. I know about you and your agenda and I will not let my people to be slandered. Regardless of what that pro-Bush shill "Rev." Peterson may say, blacks do have moral character and are a glorious creation of Almighty God. Instead of blaming the majority of crime on black people, we should be exposing the Bush administration, helping our fellow man, and exposing tyranny in this country.

By TruthSeeker24.