The Roman Catholic Church

[Churchwork]

Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church demands that Mary be a co-Redeemer even though she was born into sin and was a sinner? How can a sinner be a substitute? I find these statements problematic for not keeping separate the Word from the Church, which causes the latte to be exalted to a higher place than it belongs or was intended:

"To make it in any sense an infallible revelation, or in other words a revelation at all to us, we need a power to interpret the testament that shall have equal authority with that testament itself." (The Question Box, p. 95)
"An infallible Bible is no use without an infallible interpreter..." (My Catholic Faith, p. 145).
"...The Scriptures can never serve as a complete Rule of Faith and a complete guide to heaven independently of an authorized, living interpreter." (The Faith of Our Fathers, p. 68).
"The Church is the only divinely constituted teacher of Revelation. Now, the Scripture is the great depository of the Word of God. Therefore, the Church is the divinely appointed Custodian and Interpreter of the Bible. For, her office of infallible Guide were superfluous if each individual could interpret the Bible for himself...God never intended the Bible to be the Christians' rule of faith independently of the living authority of the Church." (Ibid., p. 77).
"We must, therefore, conclude that the Scriptures alone cannot be a sufficient guide and rule of faith...because they are not of themselves clear and intelligible even in matters of the highest importance..." (The Faith of Our Fathers, p. 73).
Catholic officials follow up this claim by stating that one can get the true meaning only from the Catholic Church. A Catechism for Adults on page 10 says, "How can you get the true meaning of the Bible? You can get it only from God's official interpreter, the Catholic Church."
"How can you get the true meaning of the Bible? You can get it only from God's official interpreter, the Catholic Church. 'This, then, you must understand first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is made by private interpretation' (2nd Peter 1:20)." (A Catechism for Adults, p. 10).
"No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. This shows plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one's private judgment or private spirit..." (From the footnote on 2 Pet. 1:20, Douay- Rheims Version, p. 582).
"...St. Peter...declared against private interpretation of the Scriptures (2 Pet. I, 20..." (Father Smith Instructs Jackson, p. 53).

We call your attention to the fact that they want you to make a private interpretation of the above verse. What kind of rule is it that says we can make a private interpretation of a verse which says we can't make a private interpretation! Catholics are always inconsistent on this point. They quote Scripture to support their doctrine expecting us to understand and to make a private interpretation. However, when we quote a passage which refutes their doctrine, they tell us that it is wrong to make private interpretations!

[Razor]

Greetings Troy,

Should we not be discussing common ground that we have in Jesus Christ with Roman Catholics instead of Judging them?
After all Faith in Christ is the only righteousness in the sight of God...

What each denomination does physicaly as it goes about having Faith in Christ Jesus spiritualy means nothing to God after all is said and done.

Peace

[Churchwork]

We should not judge the Roman Catholic Church, but nor should we accept their confusion.

After all is said and done, having faith in Christ makes all the difference in the world to receive the gift of eternal life by the grace of God, to be rewarded for overcoming in that faith, and to be with God in the new city.

What denominations do has a bearing on deceiving people, and helping people, so we need to be aware of not being deceived. After all, what Christ did on the cross for us, flows to us who are in Him to abide in the truth.

Since you are a universalist and not a Christian, what I have said here can not reach your conscience because your spirit is dead to God in which you need to yet be born-again.

Love and truth is peace.

[stray bullet]

Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church demands that Mary be a co-Redeemer even though she was born into sin and was a sinner? How can a sinner be a substitute?

I think there may be a little confusion here on what the Catholic Church means. Mary could not be a substitute for Christ, as the Church teaches, her salvation was dependent on the sacrifice of Christ.

When the Church refers to Mary as a co-redeemer, it means co-redeemer of mankind. What this means is that Mary, like all the elect, the saved, are co-deemers in humanity. At the fall, humanity was condemned, but by Christ's sacrifice, humanity is redeemed. However, humanity can not be redeemed unless individuals accept that salvation. If Jesus died and no one accepted His salvation, then humanity would not be redeemed- that's all co-redeemer means. Each of us, by accepting salvation and especially helping others are helping to redeem mankind.



I find these statements problematic for not keeping separate the Word from the Church, which causes the latte to be exalted to a higher place than it belongs or was intended:

Catholics do not believe in keeping the word separate from the Church, as the Church is made up of the successors of the apostles who created the NT with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Indeed, it was the original teachings, actions and instructions of the apostles, of the Church that make up our New Testament. The Gospel that was preached orally was the teaching of the apostles and was separate from the 'word' at that time- the Old Testament. When the apostles wrote Acts, they wrote the actions of the apostles, of the Church, which later became the word. When Paul and the other apostles, the hierarchy of the Church, instructed the Christians at Corinthians, Rome, et cetera, these letters, became the word. The Church is not based on the bible, but rather the bible is based on the Church.


We call your attention to the fact that they want you to make a private interpretation of the above verse. What kind of rule is it that says we can make a private interpretation of a verse which says we can't make a private interpretation! Catholics are always inconsistent on this point. They quote Scripture to support their doctrine expecting us to understand and to make a private interpretation. However, when we quote a passage which refutes their doctrine, they tell us that it is wrong to make private interpretations!

As far as I could tell you were not quoting from official sources, so I wouldn't categorize the Catholic Church by these individuals' responses. A better source to quote from on the beliefs of Catholics would be the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I am not aware that the Catholic Church holds as an official belief that you must have private revelation regarding any verse. Rather, you are briefly quoting non-official sources who are arguing, from a biblical basis, the problems in sola scriptura and private interpretation of scripture.

[Churchwork]

I think there may be a little confusion here on what the Catholic Church means. Mary could not be a substitute for Christ, as the Church teaches, her salvation was dependent on the sacrifice of Christ.
Since what I said does not indicate I claimed the RCC said that Mary is a substitute for Christ, why speak such words as though I had? How odd that Mary would be the substitute for Christ and Christ the substitute for mankind. I know this is not what the RCC believes.


When the Church refers to Mary as a co-redeemer, it means co-redeemer of mankind. What this means is that Mary, like all the elect, the saved, are co-deemers in humanity. At the fall, humanity was condemned, but by Christ's sacrifice, humanity is redeemed. However, humanity can not be redeemed unless individuals accept that salvation. If Jesus died and no one accepted His salvation, then humanity would not be redeemed- that's all co-redeemer means. Each of us, by accepting salvation and especially helping others are helping to redeem mankind.
I find this inappropriate still since others should be called co-redeemers as much as Mary, but you don't find this. There is what you say and then there is practice. The practice does not agree with what you say. Only when the RCC can refer to everyone as co-redeemers as much as Mary will your answer be acceptable. Even so, it places too much on man and not on Christ when saying man is a co-redeemer. This word is particular to the cross work of Christ as the Redeemer without any co-redeemers.


Catholics do not believe in keeping the word separate from the Church, as the Church is made up of the successors of the apostles who created the NT with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Indeed, it was the original teachings, actions and instructions of the apostles, of the Church that make up our New Testament. The Gospel that was preached orally was the teaching of the apostles and was separate from the 'word' at that time- the Old Testament. When the apostles wrote Acts, they wrote the actions of the apostles, of the Church, which later became the word. When Paul and the other apostles, the hierarchy of the Church, instructed the Christians at Corinthians, Rome, et cetera, these letters, became the word. The Church is not based on the bible, but rather the bible is based on the Church.

I'll have to refuse your claim since this statement I do find unacceptable, "shall have equal authority with that testament itself." Man will never have equal testimony with the testament itself. The Word is unparalleled.

The Bible which is the Word was foreknown by God and compiled in the 66 books that sums of Jesus the Word. God foreknew because The Godhead held a council between the Father, Son and Spirit the Son would be obedient unto the Father as expressed in the Word to erect authority on man. The RCC adds to those books which can be shown why they do not belong. The church does not come before the NT if the NT was in God's heart before it was recorded for the church. Ergo, this statement is false: "The Church is not based on the bible, but rather the bible is based on the Church". The Church is based on the Bible for the Bible was foreknown by God, thus, producing the Church. The RCC believes in non-OSAS having no confidence God has the foreknowledge to give eternal life at new birth. These two false teachings agree with each other as being not of God.

Also, the church does not have what you call a heirarchy of 10 or 12 different levels like a corporation. There are the apostles and the elders, that's it. This is the extent of the levels in the Church. Apostles operate regionally while elders take care of a Biblical locality. The corporations of the world come from the RCC system, but no such system is found the NT.


As far as I could tell you were not quoting from official sources, so I wouldn't categorize the Catholic Church by these individuals' responses. A better source to quote from on the beliefs of Catholics would be the Catechism of the Catholic Church. I am not aware that the Catholic Church holds as an official belief that you must have private revelation regarding any verse. Rather, you are briefly quoting non-official sources who are arguing, from a biblical basis, the problems in sola scriptura and private interpretation of scripture.
You would be agreeing then that the problem with the RCC is that they believe "No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. This shows plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one's private judgment or private spirit..." when you said "I am not aware that the Catholic Church holds as an official belief that you must have private revelation regarding any verse." What you say and what the RCC says is indeed the problem! You both agree that the Holy Spirit does not give personal revelation. And the list of this thought goes on, "Catechism for Adults on page 10 says, 'How can you get the true meaning of the Bible? You can get it only from God's official interpreter, the Catholic Church.'"

This is of course Judaized Christianity of intermediary priesthood that should be rejected in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

[stray bullet]

Since what I said does not indicate I claimed the RCC said that Mary is a substitute for Christ, why speak such words as though I had? How odd that Mary would be the substitute for Christ and Christ the substitute for mankind. I know this is not what the RCC believes.

via: "How can a sinner be a substitute?"


I find this inappropriate still since others should be called co-redeemers as much as Mary, but you don't find this. There is what you say and then there is practice. The practice does not agree with what you say. Only when the RCC can refer to everyone as co-redeemers as much as Mary will your answer be acceptable. Even so, it places too much on man and not on Christ when saying man is a co-redeemer. This word is particular to the cross work of Christ as the Redeemer without any co-redeemers.

Co-redeemer has been used to describe Mary and all mankind. I certainly didn't think up "Oh, everyone is a co-redeemer too". If you read about the Church, this is the position. It does not take away from Christ, but draws us to the death and resurrection. It emphasizes, rightly, our dire need to bring others to the faith. In realizing we are 'co-redeemers' we understand the importance not only of our salvation, but of mankind.



I'll have to refuse your claim since this statement I do find unacceptable, "shall have equal authority with that testament itself." Man will never have equal testimony with the testament itself. The Word is unparalleled.

Man is not equal with the word of God, because he is fallible. However, anything that comes from God is infallible. The apostles were men, but wrote the bible. Thus the Church, the successors of the apostles, when led by the Holy Spirit, teach infallibly, as all that comes from God is infallible.


The Bible which is the Word was foreknown by God and compiled in the 66 books

66 books according to whom? I don't see anything in the bible that states there are 66 books of revelation and that is all there will ever be.


that sums of Jesus the Word. God foreknew because The Godhead held a council between the Father, Son and Spirit the Son would be obedient unto the Father as expressed in the Word to erect authority on man. The RCC adds to those books which can be shown why they do not belong.

The Catholic Church teaches what comes from the Holy Spirit. They did this in 33AD when there was no NT, only Holy Tradition. Much of Holy Tradition was written down as scripture, the Gospels, the Acts, the Epistles. However, much of apostolic teach still remains and that is what the Church continues to teach.


The church does not come before the NT if the NT was in God's heart before it was recorded for the church. Ergo, this statement is false: "The Church is not based on the bible, but rather the bible is based on the Church". The Church is based on the Bible for the Bible was foreknown by God, thus, producing the Church. The RCC believes in non-OSAS having no confidence God has the foreknowledge to give eternal life at new birth. These two false teachings agree with each other as being not of God.

OSAS is unbiblical. The NT refers to the actually writing of the apostles. While the truth of the NT is as eternal as God, the documents themselves come to us from the Holy Spirt and via the Church. Since the Church is the pillar and protector of truth, the bible comes from the Church. The Catholic Church predates the bible and the texts found in the bible.


Also, the church does not have what you call a heirarchy othe levels in the Church. Apostles operate regionally while elders take care of a Biblical locality. The corporations of the world come from the RCC system, but no such system is found the NT.

That is not how the early Church worked. The early Church taught inter-regionally. The seven catholic letters of the NT, for example, confirm this. These letters were instruction for the whole Church, not merely from one source to a location, but to all locations.



You would be agreeing then that the problem with the RCC is that they believe "No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.

This is what is said in the bible. That's not a problem, but the truth. Prophesy comes from God, not private (man) interpretation.


This shows plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one's private judgment or private spirit..." when you said "I am not aware that the Catholic Church holds as an official belief that you must have private revelation regarding any verse." What you say and what the RCC says is indeed the problem! You both agree that the Holy Spirit does not give personal revelation. And the list of this thought goes on, "Catechism for Adults on page 10 says, 'How can you get the true meaning of the Bible? You can get it only from God's official interpreter, the Catholic Church.'"

Private interpretation is not the same as Holy Spirit revelation. When private interpretation is led by the Holy Spirit, it is no longer private interpretation, but a revelation.

"Catechism for adults" is not a official source from the Catholic Church. However, it is correct in that the Catholic Church, when acted upon by the Holy Spirit, offers interpretation of scripture for us, from God.

[Churchwork]

via: "How can a sinner be a substitute?"
How can a sinner be a substitute? Not via. Not at all! Mary does not substitute for she was born into sin.


Co-redeemer has been used to describe Mary and all mankind. I certainly didn't think up "Oh, everyone is a co-redeemer too". If you read about the Church, this is the position. It does not take away from Christ, but draws us to the death and resurrection. It emphasizes, rightly, our dire need to bring others to the faith. In realizing we are 'co-redeemers' we understand the importance not only of our salvation, but of mankind.
Those whom I fellowship with in the church would never call man the redeemer or co-redeemer. This debases Christ. There is only one substitute. The church, in history, at least those who were spiritual Christians, never think of themselves as redeemers. This is solely Christ's work. I am drawn to Christ not because I am a redeemer, for I am not, but because I believe in Christ that He is true. Satan is the author of confusion. Christians say we have a relationship and responsibility to God's grace, but never do we use the same word applied solely to the Son of God, our Redeemer, Lord andSavior. God does not think of us as Redeemers, so why do you? You go too far, and does not help mankind. When you speak, you should think of the little brother, or those who are weak in their flesh. If they hear about themselves as redeemers they will take their eye off Christ a little more. It would not give reverence to God. You lack reverence and love man too much for man is a sinner who wants to be co-redeemer on par with God.


Man is not equal with the word of God, because he is fallible. However, anything that comes from God is infallible. The apostles were men, but wrote the bible. Thus the Church, the successors of the apostles, when led by the Holy Spirit, teach infallibly, as all that comes from God is infallible.
Yes, and still it is false to say that man is equal with God: "shall have equal authority with that testament itself". If you don't believe this quote from the RCC minions, then you should stand up and reject it, but if you can't repent, know why - you are possessed by the demon of the roman catholicism.


66 books according to whom? I don't see anything in the bible that states there are 66 books of revelation and that is all there will ever be.
According to the Holy Spirit. If you read the Bible you find additional books are not in harmony with God's Word. Mistakes are easily found. Ergo, God's Word is 66 books. I know you need a legalistic declaration but God will not cater to your fleshly demands.


The Catholic Church teaches what comes from the Holy Spirit. They did this in 33AD when there was no NT, only Holy Tradition. Much of Holy Tradition was written down as scripture, the Gospels, the Acts, the Epistles. However, much of apostolic teach still remains and that is what the Church continues to teach.
The Roman Catholic Church did not come about until the 5th and 6th centuries. The Constantine church preceded it in the 4th century.

The Scriptures are not tradition but the very Word of God you despise so much that you call it tradition. God is not a tradition. He is God and Jesus is the Word, the 66 books of the Bible which are His fullnesss. They are not deemed holy tradition, but the compiled Word.

The RCC does not abide in the teaching of the apostles appointing elders to take care of Biblical localities, for the RCC denies Biblical locality in addition to the RCC relishing in its other false teachings.


OSAS is unbiblical. The NT refers to the actually writing of the apostles. While the truth of the NT is as eternal as God, the documents themselves come to us from the Holy Spirt and via the Church. Since the Church is the pillar and protector of truth, the bible comes from the Church. The Catholic Church predates the bible and the texts found in the bible.
I understand you have no faith to believe God can give eternal life because you are not a Christian and have no faith in God's all-knowing infinite foreknowledge of when to give eternal life. The documents of God's Word do not come from the church, but are given unto the church. This is proper cause and effect. You can't have church+Holy Spirit as the source. There is only one source = Holy Spirit. Satan is the author of confusion. Since the church is the protector of the truth it must abide in the Holy Spirit which gives the Bible.

The Roman Catholic Church came after the Word of God in its beginnings in the 4th or 5th century. The Word was eternally existing for the Word is the Son of God. See John 1.1.

The Word of God even predicted the coming of the great harlot RCC in describing the Thyatira church period.

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/7churches.htm


That is not how the early Church worked. The early Church taught inter-regionally. The seven catholic letters of the NT, for example, confirm this. These letters were instruction for the whole Church, not merely from one source to a location, but to all locations.
I know this is not how the early church worked, that's why I brought up the corruption of the Roman Catholic Church. The early church taught there were indepedent Biblical localities taken care of by elders appointed by regional apostles. It is that simple. There is no control beyond the center for a region of apostles alone. No heirarchy and power control system of the RCC popery. Most popes, if not all popes are going to hell because they were never born-again and love the way of the world too much.

Nothing in the NT even remotely suggests power control above regional centers inter-regionally. The 7 church letters to the 7 churches in Rev. 2 & 3 where written to indepdent Biblical localities to show forth the church age these past 20 centuries in the 7 church periods. These 7 local churches were all part of a region which had a regional center of aposles, and the Work of the Ministry for the Church did not expand beyond this. These 7 church letters are for the universal church.


This is what is said in the bible. That's not a problem, but the truth. Prophesy comes from God, not private (man) interpretation.
God speaks privately to individuals in their spirit by the Holy Spirit. The veil is rent and we all have access to God's Spirit. This does not mean we go on our own way from the Church, for we still need agreement in the body of Christ as well.

Your rejection of this truth produces the judaized Christianity of intermediary priesthood (levitical) and paying for indulgences, and confessing to a priest. Today we have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.


Private interpretation is not the same as Holy Spirit revelation. When private interpretation is led by the Holy Spirit, it is no longer private interpretation, but a revelation.
Revelation from the Holy Spirit is done privately in the spirit of the believer. It is not done with a loud cry or by approval of the senate of the RCC. God speaks personally to people privately in revelation. It is no longer revelation if it demands the consultation of the mind of the senate of the Roman Catholic Church. Thank God for this the veil is rent.


"Catechism for adults" is not a official source from the Catholic Church. However, it is correct in that the Catholic Church, when acted upon by the Holy Spirit, offers interpretation of scripture for us, from God.
The Roman Catholic Church is without authority for its intepretations have shown to be false: e.g. intermediary preisthood, paying for indulgences, purgatory, goddess idolatry, and hierarchy structure beyond the call the of the Scriptures of Biblical locality.

May you yet come to Christ to receive new birth and enter into the new creation so that you may no longer stray like a warped bullet.

You're banned for creating confusion, mindless repetition and belligerency, as one of the tares, trying to look like the wheat, whom God will put His sickle to.

[Churchwork]

All Christians are saints, not just those the Roman Catholic Church designate for sainthood.

[Saint2300]

Protestand might not be right.
I always feel confused with denominations.:)

[Churchwork]

Protestand might not be right.
I always feel confused with denominations.:)

As you should since God did not ordain denominations. Satan is winning with dominations.

God said do not divide the church by denominations: don't say "I am of Cephas" or "I am of Apollos"; don't even say "I am of Christ" which akin to non-denominationalism, when compared to denominations.

What is the solution? It is already disclosed on the forum under "Church and the Work", repeating the clarity of the Word. God's way is according to Biblical locality wherein the apostles apoint elders to take care of Biblical localities, that is, whole towns, cities or remote areas.

Thus, whatever differences arise in a locality are contained within, and do not spread beyond to other localities or regions. We should never divide the church based on persons, doctrine, regions or countries; not even time!

[prophecystudent]

I am new here having been referred here by a person from another forum.

I have read with some interest this thread. While I have a problem with wholesale condemnation of a complete denomination, I have to agree with some of the statements regarding the RCC.

RCC claims that the popes are infallible. Not true as we are all fallible.

RCC places far too much emphasis on ritual and tradition. The bible specifically warns against such activities.

RCC prays to Mary for intervention. Christians should pray only to God/Christ as it says in the bible. As one author put it (AIR) there is only one route to Heaven and it is not thru Mary.

RCC places far too much emphasis on relics, which lead to worship of such things.

There is no purgatory, there is no limbo and no biblical proof for such concepts.

There are many others, but this will suffice to make the example.

In truth, I do not judge individual members of RCC. I find a number of things the RCC does to be unscriptural, and which could lead people in the wrong direction. I know there are many true Christians who are members of the RCC. Indeed I met quite a number of them when I was working in a counselling center for 100 Huntley Street some years ago.

I would venture that we should be cautious about judging individuals, but not be shy about judging institutions that teach things not of the bible.

Fred

[Evanescence]

RCC claims that the popes are infallible. Not true as we are all fallible.

The church believes that the Pope's teachings are infallible, which makes sense if you believe in a magisterium of the church.


RCC prays to Mary for intervention. Christians should pray only to God/Christ as it says in the bible. As one author put it (AIR) there is only one route to Heaven and it is not thru Mary.

We only 'intercess' through Mary just like you would pray for your friend, we ask Mary to pray for us, of cause we still aknowledge that we are saved through Jesus christ, the one mediator to God.

Oh and welcome, I am new here as well :)

Evanescence

[Churchwork]

While I have a problem with wholesale condemnation of a complete denomination, I have to agree with some of the statements regarding the RCC.
Since God never ordained denominations, and He has expressed as much in the Scriptures, then it is final!



In truth, I do not judge individual members of RCC.
You have in fact judged, by listing various things you say they are wrong about, which they are. When you are even partially condemning them instead of as you say "wholesale condemnation" you are still condemning. Be "not doubletongued" (1 Tim. 3.8).


I find a number of things the RCC does to be unscriptural, and which could lead people in the wrong direction. I know there are many true Christians who are members of the RCC.
I don't think you know this, you only think you do.


I would venture that we should be cautious about judging individuals, but not be shy about judging institutions that teach things not of the bible.
Judging has two sides to a coin. You can also judgingly overassume someone to be a Christian that is not. To overassume either way is not being cautious.

[Churchwork]

The church believes that the Pope's teachings are infallible, which makes sense if you believe in a magisterium of the church.

We only 'intercess' through Mary just like you would pray for your friend, we ask Mary to pray for us, of cause we still aknowledge that we are saved through Jesus christ, the one mediator to God.

Oh and welcome, I am new here as well Evanescence

This does not make sense at all. Just because someone claims to have authority does not make their teaching infallible. The Bible considers the RCC not the church today but the great harlot of religious Rome, that woman that sits on the beast of nations to make them drunk with the wine of the wrath of her fornications (Rev. 14.8).

Most popes were never born-again since there is no popery in the church. If they were saved they could never have tried to become popes or add to God's Word, the 66 books of the Bible. Authority does not do this.

When you pray for a friend, you do not pray through Mary, nor do you pray for your friend to pray for you, since this is self-centered. The comparison is not the same at all. To intercess through Mary is the worship of a goddess that sinned. This if false interecessory prayer of the evil spirit since you depend on sin as your intermediary just as intermediary priesthood is judaized Christianity, yet the levitical priesthood has passed.

Mary is asleep in Hades. She can not interceed for you. You should not ask dead people to pray for you. This is spiritism and necromancy.

You know not what you do.

[prophecystudent]

Since God never ordained denominations, and He has expressed as much in the Scriptures, then it is final!

I agree that nothing I have read in the bible declares that there are/should be denominations. I agree that the "real" church is the body of those who believe in Christ.

Because a group of people, of like understanding of scripture, get together and study or worship is not necessarily bad. Nor does the fact that they may define their group with a title.

What makes denominationalism bad is when it leads to "warfare" between the groups of believers. To say that a group believes, for example, in pre-trib rapture makes them wrong or less than believers is, in my opinion wrong.

To claim that one's own interpretation of scripture is infallible or perfect presumes too much. That is not to say that all/every group or individual that may have a different interpretation of scripture is correct. We have to weigh what they say against scripture and make the determination.


You have in fact judged, by listing various things you say they are wrong about, which they are. When you are even partially condemning them instead of as you say "wholesale condemnation" you are still condemning. Be "not doubletongued" (1 Tim. 3.8).

As I see it, there is a difference between judging practices and policies of an organization or individuals and judging the individuals themselves. Perhaps describing things that are wrong with the RCC could be considered to be judging the individuals who continue to support or perpetuate such errors.

I draw a distinction between judging the sin, and judging the sinner. As Christ said, we should hate the sin and love the sinner.



I don't think you know this, you only think you do.

I have personal knowledge from association with numbers of Catholics, long discussions with them regarding their beliefs. They believe as I do regarding the gospel of Christ, salvation, etc. Including some of their priests. They referred to themselves as charismatic Catholics.

To claim that someone who is a member of the RCC is not saved, or is not a believer is, IMO, wrong. Perhaps we are missing each other's point due to semantics. When I say I "know" something, that means I have observed or studied, and reached what I consider to be an informed opinion. When I observe a person and discuss at length their beliefs regarding salvation, and those beliefs are in accordance with my understanding and beliefs, then I can say that I know they are believers.



Judging has two sides to a coin. You can also judgingly overassume someone to be a Christian that is not. To overassume either way is not being cautious.

Again, perhaps we are "talking past each other". However, as stated above, when I find a person who professes the same beliefs as I have regarding salvation I assume that person is a Christian in what you and I appear to consider the true sense of the word. Thus I do not consider such a conclusion to "over assume".

My belief is quite simple, I guess.

I believe that Christ is the Son of God. That He was born in human form with the sole purpose of dying as God's perfect Lamb, as sacrifice to pay for the sins of all mankind. There is one requirement for us to receive that salvation, accepting the FREE GIFT OF SALVATION by recognizing Christ and His sacrifice.

The bible is the inerrant word of God. Unfortunately, humans are not inerrant and we make mistakes. Some of those mistakes are when we interpret the Word of God. Until we receive full knowledge from God, when we receive our glorified bodies, we cannot assume that our interpretation of scripture is perfect.

Fred

[Churchwork]

To claim that one's own interpretation of scripture is infallible or perfect presumes too much. That is not to say that all/every group or individual that may have a different interpretation of scripture is correct. We have to weigh what they say against scripture and make the determination.
Of course, I would disagree with you on this because God has given the Word to know it, not to not know something particularly. John 3.16,18 for example is clear, to be saved you must come through Christ and those who do not believe are condemned already.


As I see it, there is a difference between judging practices and policies of an organization or individuals and judging the individuals themselves. Perhaps describing things that are wrong with the RCC could be considered to be judging the individuals who continue to support or perpetuate such errors.
Of course, since men make organizations. That's why God said do not say you are of Cephas, or you are of Apollos or don't even say you are of Christ to divide denominationally or non-denominationally.


I have personal knowledge from association with numbers of Catholics, long discussions with them regarding their beliefs. They believe as I do regarding the gospel of Christ, salvation, etc. Including some of their priests. They referred to themselves as charismatic Catholics.
I would not presume this as you do, because just because someone says they believe the gospel, and yet they manifest all types of strange teachings and false fruit, would suggest they in fact in their heart of hearts do not accept the gospel at all, e.g. Mary idolatry or paying for indulgences or intermediary priesthood or popery not found in the Scriptures or mistreatment of women not allowed to be apostles and so forth.


To claim that someone who is a member of the RCC is not saved, or is not a believer is, IMO, wrong. Perhaps we are missing each other's point due to semantics. When I say I "know" something, that means I have observed or studied, and reached what I consider to be an informed opinion. When I observe a person and discuss at length their beliefs regarding salvation, and those beliefs are in accordance with my understanding and beliefs, then I can say that I know they are believers.
To overassume people are saved is wrong when they manifest so much false fruit. Who made you God and saved these people in poor conscience? Is there no end to which you will go to call people saved? Was Hitler saved? He said he was a Christian in placing himself with the RCC. This is the problem with making nothing count. God will very often show someone who is not in the body of Christ by their affiliation and words. I do not think we are missing each others points by semantics. I think you really believe what you do.

I believe the reason you make this mistake of overassuming people to be Christians is because you do not understand Matthew 13 of the teaching of the tares, where God said they look like the wheat, but in fact they are unsaved. You should study this matter deeply (I will pray that you do):

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Matthew_13.htm


I believe that Christ is the Son of God. That He was born in human form with the sole purpose of dying as God's perfect Lamb, as sacrifice to pay for the sins of all mankind. There is one requirement for us to receive that salvation, accepting the FREE GIFT OF SALVATION by recognizing Christ and His sacrifice.
Remember again, many who make this very claim you just made are in fact not born-again at all. Why? It is because they are able to say it in their unrenewed heads, while their spirits remain unquickened by the Holy Spirit. It is one thing to study the Scriptures mentally, but to truly be regenerated is something else. The former does not produce new life, but the latter is entrance into the new creation. This would help explain why some alter the Word of God and claim Biblical tongues means gibberish babble, when there is no gibberish babble in the Bible.



The bible is the inerrant word of God. Unfortunately, humans are not inerrant and we make mistakes. Some of those mistakes are when we interpret the Word of God. Until we receive full knowledge from God, when we receive our glorified bodies, we cannot assume that our interpretation of scripture is perfect. Fred

Sin is not our guiding principle so it does not determine our knowing. Our knowing is in our new spirit, and though it can not be completely correct on all things it certainly can be right before God and knowing on a great many things revealed in the Word and by revelation.

This is definitely a false teaching you produce and it is not of God when you say you can not know. I know this for a fact, for God has given us the Scriptures to know objectively and subjectively. There is no doubt about this. The reason you believe that you can not know while at the same time saying you know certain people to be Christians that are roman catholics (but that indicate they are not Christians by their false fruit by what they truly believe) is being doubletongued.

I have pointed out this doubletalk of yours because I come across it too many times in Pentecostals as they use it to rationalize their position for their false tongues. I believe this is what you are undergoing to rationalize your not knowing your gibberish babble. God did not give gibberish babble, but it is man's alteration of God's Word. I know this and impart this truth to you so that you may repent, because you have definitely altered God's Word when you say in your profile "No" to "Biblical tongues are languages only". This false teaching you have needs to die on the cross for tongues are known, not unknown.

This unknowing is a passivity induced by the evil spirit to control you in which you have unwittingly received into your life by your own volition. God wants you to know. The evil spirit says you can not know. You favor the teaching of the latter.

[prophecystudent]

Of course, I would disagree with you on this because God has given the Word to know it, not to not know something particularly. John 3.16,18 for example is clear, to be saved you must come through Christ and those who do not believe are condemned already.


Of course, since men make organizations. That's why God said do not say you are of Cephas, or you are of Apollos or don't even say you are of Christ to divide denominationally or non-denominationally.


I would not presume this as you do, because just because someone says they believe the gospel, and yet they manifest all types of strange teachings and false fruit, would suggest they in fact in their heart of hearts do not accept the gospel at all, e.g. Mary idolatry or paying for indulgences or intermediary priesthood or popery not found in the Scriptures or mistreatment of women not allowed to be apostles and so forth.


To overassume people are saved is wrong when they manifest so much false fruit. Who made you God and saved these people in poor conscience? Is there no end to which you will go to call people saved? Was Hitler saved? He said he was a Christian in placing himself with the RCC. This is the problem with making nothing count. God will very often show someone who is not in the body of Christ by their affiliation and words. I do not think we are missing each others points by semantics. I think you really believe what you do.

I believe the reason you make this mistake of overassuming people to be Christians is because you do not understand Matthew 13 of the teaching of the tares, where God said they look like the wheat, but in fact they are unsaved. You should study this matter deeply (I will pray that you do):

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/Matthew_13.htm


Remember again, many who make this very claim you just made are in fact not born-again at all. Why? It is because they are able to say it in their unrenewed heads, while their spirits remain unquickened by the Holy Spirit. It is one thing to study the Scriptures mentally, but to truly be regenerated is something else. The former does not produce new life, but the latter is entrance into the new creation. This would help explain why some alter the Word of God and claim Biblical tongues means gibberish babble, when there is no gibberish babble in the Bible.


Sin is not our guiding principle so it does not determine our knowing. Our knowing is in our new spirit, and though it can not be completely correct on all things it certainly can be right before God and knowing on a great many things revealed in the Word and by revelation.

This is definitely a false teaching you produce and it is not of God when you say you can not know. I know this for a fact, for God has given us the Scriptures to know objectively and subjectively. There is no doubt about this. The reason you believe that you can not know while at the same time saying you know certain people to be Christians that are roman catholics (but that indicate they are not Christians by their false fruit by what they truly believe) is being doubletongued.

I have pointed out this doubletalk of yours because I come across it too many times in Pentecostals as they use it to rationalize their position for their false tongues. I believe this is what you are undergoing to rationalize your not knowing your gibberish babble. God did not give gibberish babble, but it is man's alteration of God's Word. I know this and impart this truth to you so that you may repent, because you have definitely altered God's Word when you say in your profile "No" to "Biblical tongues are languages only". This false teaching you have needs to die on the cross for tongues are known, not unknown.

This unknowing is a passivity induced by the evil spirit to control you in which you have unwittingly received into your life by your own volition. God wants you to know. The evil spirit says you can not know. You favor the teaching of the latter.


I think I have found the answer I was looking for. It has been interesting to view your responses, and what appear, to me, to be rather presumptive ideas.

Your presumption that you are infallible in your interpretatation of scripture leaves me unsettled, and concerned.

I think the best course of action is for me to drop out of this forum. I have read and studied at some length prophecy, especially the end times.

I am fully aware of the prostitute that sits on the beast, who she is, what she will do to the real church when she comes to power. I also know what will happen to her. It is told very clearly in Revelation.

As I said, it has been interesting.

Good by and God bless you.

Fred

[Churchwork]

prophecystudent (Fred),

What I have told you is not presumptive, since what you claim can not be found in the Scriptures, so you ought not to presume and overassume them, just as I do not, i.e. particularly your false tongues gibberish babble and overassuming people to be believers yet they have 4 or 5 or more absolute false teachings which are not fruit of the Spirit. This is a contradiction you wield in your heart that needs to die on the cross if you are a Christian.

My knowing this about you, naturally instead of repenting, you look to find excuse and blame anything but yourself. This is why you accuse then falsely to say things that I don't say of myself, when you said "Your presumption that you are infallible in your interpretation of scripture leaves me unsettled, and concerned".

Since I did not say I know all things, but that what I have said is true and proven and provable in the Word specifically, where do you come with this accusation out of nowhere by claiming I know all things or that what I have said could not be true when you have NO reason or basis for saying so? Your reaction is not humble at all, but like that great vague accuser that is not fond of specifics. Just like the birds of the air land in the tree of faith, this accusation you lodge in the tree of faith accusing Christians, comes from evil spirits which you accept willingly.

What we know is that roman catholicism has several extremely aberrant teachings, and that if one were born-again they would walk away from. For you to overassume their salvation is like Satan declaring something without basis and yourself playing God. Secondly, your own false teaching of gibberish babble is equally aberrant and Pharasaical since you have no way to justify it in the Word your false tongues; and it requires, even demands, you to alter the Scriptures in your own self-induced gibberish babble to open you up to evil entry by passivity. Just like you can't know your gibberish babble, 5 interpreters give 5 different answers, so you think you can not know the Scriptures, and that when one does, you accuse them vaguely as possible of maybe being wrong. This is immature!

I agree with you the best course of action for you is "to drop out of this forum", because you can not repent in your overassuming people to be saved when they have all kinds of horrible teaching including your own in false tongues. This forum is not for you.

You may say you know who the "prostitute" is who sits on the beast, but your self-declaration they are Christians is a bit much. You are contradicting yourself. Just as they can not repent, you can not repent from your own false tongues. And as result what is coming to pass, are those lost such as yourself, in the Three Wave Movements not of God:

- Pentecostalism (or montanism) first wave movement of false tongues 100 years ago.
- 50 years ago the Charismatic antics and their false tongues.
- today, the Charismatic RCC with all her false teachings as the great harlot, to be married to the first two wave movements in the same false tongues.

Do you get the picture? What is the common denominator here? False tongues in all three cases! If Penetcostalism today was to be one of the main portions of the 7 church periods in Rev. 2 & 3, God would have indicated it and He would have indicated gibberish babble was a in important element, yet there is not one instance of gibberish babble in the Bible. So why do you do it? Evil spirits have a hold on you. God is against psychic gibberish and mediums babble that you strive for.

I will ban you so you do not have to worry about not having the self-control to avoid this forum. This is this is not a gibberish promoting babble forum, nor is it an ecumenical RCC forum where so many are saved as you presume. What you teach is not found in the Word.

[saint]

Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church demands that Mary be a co-Redeemer even though she was born into sin and was a sinner? I'm not Roman Catholic, but I am a big Church history student.

Your statement here that the RCC demands that Mary be a co-Redeemer is totally false. While there is a movement within the RCC that would like to make it true-- it is not their official teaching and never has been.

It would be nice if you retracted such a false statement.

[Churchwork]

saint,

This is the problem you have to deal with. Roman Catholics say to me personally Mary is the co-redeemer today, now. You say otherwise. I say they are wrong and you are misrepresenting what roman catholics say today since they have said it over and over. You should not ask me to retract what sins are issued forth from the mouths of the sinning roman catholocists. You should speak to them, not me.

They respond by saying they don't mean Mary is the Savior, but she is a co-redeemer in the sense that she gives her life to Christ so she played a role in redemption. I say to them, why don't you often speak of all Christians as co-redeemers then, and inordinately point out Mary is a co-redeemer? And doesn't this also confuse Christ as our Redeemer if you are always calling Christians redeemers or usually just Mary? Isn't Satan the author of confusion? They give no answer coyly. You can see how this behavior pattern by Roman Catholics is wrong because they are trying to rationalize Mary being sinless when she is not.

Suffice it to say the problem with the Roman Catholic system as the great harlot of religious Rome is in claiming Mary is sinless, which creates this confusion so that a segment of roman catholicism teaches Mary is a co-redeemer.

I pray this will help you.

[lismore]

I'm not Roman Catholic, but I am a big Church history student.

Your statement here that the RCC demands that Mary be a co-Redeemer is totally false. While there is a movement within the RCC that would like to make it true-- it is not their official teaching and never has been.

It would be nice if you retracted such a false statement.

Maybe you have not seen what Catholics teach:

Say the Rosary every day...
Pray, pray a lot and offer sacrifices for sinners...
I'm Our Lady of the Rosary.
Only I will be able to help you.
...In the end My Immaculate Heart will triumph."



—Our Lady at Fatima


'only I will be able to help you'. This sounds like un Christian doctrine to me. Only the lord is able to help you, mary cannot help you- she needed a saviour herself.

These are some of the titles catholics call Mary:

Ark of the covenant,
Gate of heaven,
Morning star,
Health of the sick,
Refuge of sinners,
Comforter of the afflicted,
Help of Christians,
Queen of angels,
Queen of patriarchs,
Queen of prophets,
Queen of apostles,
Queen of martyrs,
Queen of Heaven
Queen of confessors,
Queen of virgins,
Queen of all saints,
Queen conceived without original sin,
Queen assumed into heaven,
Queen of the most holy Rosary,
Queen of families
Queen of peace.

The true origins of the RCC are pagan.

'About 200 B.C. mystery cults began to appear in Rome just as they had earlier in Greece, from Egypt. Most notable was the Cybele cult centered on Vatican hill ...Associated with the Cybele cult was that of her lover, Attis, Tammuz, see Ezekiel 8:14), Osiris, Dionysus, or Orpheus. The name most known from the mysteries religion was Osiris. He was worshiped as a god of ever-reviving vegetation and life. Born of a virgin, he died and was reborn annually'


Note: Eastern Star worshiping, Ezekiel 8:14, Then he brought me to the door of the gate of the Lord's house which was toward the north; and, behold, there sat women weeping for Tammuz. Mary and baby Jesus is really Semaramis and Tammuz from the mystery religion of ancient Babylon.

If you read Jeremiah 7 you will see Jermeiah prophecied against queen of heaven worship.

:)

[lismore]

The church believes that the Pope's teachings are infallible, which makes sense if you believe in a magisterium of the church.





The pope's teaching are infallible even when different popes contradict each other:confused: .

[Garotte]

Catholic Cathechism:

969 "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfillment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation . . . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."512

47. The RC teaches: Mary is the co-mediator to whom we can entrust all our cares and petitions. (Catechisms 968-970, 2677).

The Bible teaches: Christ Jesus is the one mediator to whom we can entrust all our cares and petitions. I Timothy 2:5, John 14:13&14, I Peter 5:7.

Main Entry: me·di·a·trix
Pronunciation: -'A-triks
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Late Latin, feminine of mediator
Date: 15th century
: a woman who is a mediator












http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/pray0685.htm


Prayer to Our Lady, Health of the Sick

Virgin, most holy, Mother of the Word Incarnate, Treasurer of graces, and Refuge of sinners, I fly top your motherly affection with lively faith, and I beg of you the grace ever to do the will of God.

Into your most holy hands I commit the keeping of my heart, asking you for health of soul and body, in the certain hope that you, my most loving Mother, will hear my prayer.

Into the bosom of your tender mercy, this day, every day of my life, and at the hour of my death, I commend my soul and body.

To you I entrust all my hopes and consolations, all my trials and miseries, my life and the end of my life, that all my actions may be ordered and disposed according to your will and that of your Divine Son. Amen.



http://www.justforcatholics.org/a64.htm

Every Christian should consider Mary with respect. She is forever to be called blessed. Yet, I think it is a sign of disrespect when people expect from her things that she cannot give. Why would people pray to her, when the Bible clearly teaches us that we should pray to God and that God alone knows our hearts (1 Kings 8:39)? Why would people ask grace from Mary, when the Bible teaches us that all grace comes from God (1 Peter 5:10)? Why should people call her "our life" and "our hope", when the Bible teaches us that the Lord is our life and hope (Colossians 3:4; 1 Timothy 1:1)? Why would people make her a mediator, when the Bible says that there is one mediator, Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2:5)? And why should people trust even the hour of their death wholly to her care? Isn't the Good Shepherd of the sheep willing to keep His own and bring them safely to glory (John 10:27,28)?
Sadly, in practice many Catholics worship Mary because they pray to her, trust in her and attribute to her titles and honors, which belong to God alone. May God grant them repentance. Rather than looking unto a creature, we should follow Mary in her godly example and apply to the Lord for salvation and all spiritual blessings.




Catholic Catechism



816 "The sole Church of Christ [is that] which our Savior, after his Resurrection, entrusted to Peter's pastoral care, commissioning him and the other apostles to extend and rule it. . . . This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in (subsist it in) the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the bishops in communion with him."267


The Second Vatican Council's Decree on Ecumenism explains: "For it is through Christ's Catholic Church alone, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained. It was to the apostolic college alone, of which Peter is the head, that we believe that our Lord entrusted all the blessings of the New Covenant, in order to establish on earth the one Body of Christ into which all those should be fully incorporated who belong in any way to the People of God."268


824 United with Christ, the Church is sanctified by him; through him and with him she becomes sanctifying. "All the activities of the Church are directed, as toward their end, to the sanctification of men in Christ and the glorification of God."292 It is in the Church that "the fullness of the means of salvation"293 has been deposited. It is in her that "by the grace of God we acquire holiness."294


"Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336


882 The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, "is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful."402 "For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered."403


883 "The college or body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter's successor, as its head." As such, this college has "supreme and full authority over the universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff."404

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


The Greek word used for rock (petra) is played against Peter (petros). Some use this passage to teach that Peter was the foundation stone of the church, that he had a primacy among the apostles, and that he became bishop of Rome. The verse will scarcely bear the first of these propositions, and certainly none of the others. Peter may be meant by the rock, but he was not the exclusive foundation.
The twelve-fold foundation of the apostles of the church:

Ephesians 2:
19
Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21
In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22
In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Rev. 21:
14
And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

This seems borne out by the fact that the words spoken unto Peter in Matt. 16:18, were spoken to all of the disciples in Matt. 18:

Matt. 18:
18
Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
19
Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.
20
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

The rock or foundation of the church is the confession (ultimately the doctrine) of the apostles, which became normative for the true church.

The word church (Greek ekklesia), means literally “ a chosen or called out assembly”. Thus the use of the word as a technical term for an assembly or group of believers in Christ was quite natural. It was not viewed as an external organization, denomination, or hierarchical system. The New Testament Church is a local autonomous congregation or an assembly which is a church in and of itself. John writes to 7 churches, in His Revelation, not to one.

Scofield commentary:

16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Peter
There is the Greek a play upon the words, "thou art Peter petros-- literally 'a little rock', and upon this rock Petra I will build my church." He does not promise to build His church upon Peter, but upon Himself, as Peter is careful to tell us

(1 Peter 2:4-9)
2:4 Coming to Him, a living stone--rejected by men but chosen and valuable to God--
2:5 you yourselves, as living stones, are being built into a spiritual house for a holy priesthood to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
2:6 For it stands in Scripture: Look! I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and valuable cornerstone, and the one who believes in Him will never be put to shame!
2:7 So the honor is for you who believe; but for the unbelieving, The stone that the builders rejected-- this One has become the cornerstone, and
2:8 A stone that causes men to stumble, and a rock that trips them up. They stumble by disobeying the message; they were destined for this.
2:9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His possession, so that you may proclaim the praises of the One who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.

church:

2 (Greek - ajpovllumi (ek=="out of," kaleo =="to call"), an assembly of called out ones). The word is used of any assembly; the word itself implies no more, as, e.g., the town-meeting at Ephesus Acts 19:39 and Israel, called out of Egypt and assembled in the wilderness Acts 7:38. Israel was a true "church," but not in any sense the N.T. church--the only point of similarity being that both were "called out" and by the same God. All else is contrast.

Following are several of the doctrinal statements made on Justification at the council of Trent. After each Canon are scriptures that contradict that Canon.

Finally, you will see the word "anathema" used many times by the Council. This means that those who disagree with the doctrines of this Council are cursed. In Gal. 1:8-9, the word "anathema" is used. The curse must come from God. Therefore, we conclude that according to Roman Catholicism, anyone who disagrees with the following Canons are cursed of God. The Roman Catholic church excommunicates those under anathema. In other words, excommunication means being outside the Christian church. Being outside the church means you are not saved.

In spite of what Catholicism states, the Bible speaks differently. Following each Canon is a list of appropriate scriptures countering the Catholic position.

1. CANON 9: "If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema."

"Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin" (Rom. 3:20).
B. "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 3:24).
C. "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law" (Rom. 3:28).
D. "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Rom. 4:3).
E. "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. 5:1).
F. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" (Eph. 2:8).
G. "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost" (Titus 3:5).

2. CANON 12: "If any one shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ's sake, or that it is that confidence alone by which we are justified ... let him be accursed"
.
"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name" John 1:12).
A. "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law" (Rom. 3:28).
B. "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Rom. 4:3).
C. "Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; 27Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself" (Heb. 7:25-27).
D. For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day" (2 Tim. 1:12).

3. Canon 14: "If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema."
.
"For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Rom. 4:3).
A. "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. 5:1).

4. Canon 23: "lf any one saith, that a man once justified can sin no more, nor lose grace, and that therefore he that falls and sins was never truly justified; or, on the other hand, that he is able, during his whole life, to avoid all sins, even those that are venial,- except by a special privilege from God, as the Church holds in regard of the Blessed Virgin; let him be anathema."
.
"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him" (John 3:36).
A. "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day" (John 6:40).
B. "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand" (John 10:28).
C. "That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord" (Rom. 5:21).
D. "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us" (1 John 2:19).
E. "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God" (1 John 5:13).
·
Canon 24: "If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema."

. "O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? 2This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? 3Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?" (Gal. 3:1-3).
A. "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. 2Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law" (Gal. 5:1-3).
·
Canon 30: "If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema."

. "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. 5:1).
A. "And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross" (Col. 2:13-14).

· Canon 33: "If any one saith, that, by the Catholic doctrine touching Justification, by this holy Synod inset forth in this present decree, the glory of God, or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ are in any way derogated from, and not rather that the truth of our faith, and the glory in fine of God and of Jesus Christ are rendered (more) illustrious; let him be anathema.
. This council declares that if anyone disagrees with it, they are damned.