Looks like the old thread is past it's character limit...

Very interesting to see that noone seems to have anything to say about what the pope's have said regarding salvation and the Catholic church. Very interesting indeed. Well take your time to go over each of the Popes' speakings.

Well anyway, for my part, I'll address each of the points mentioned. I'll enclose everyone else's texts in asterisks cos things are getting quite lengthy now.

*************************************** Jesus did not die on the cross as a “perfect sacrifice” simply because he didn’t sin. Jesus was God, and therefore, perfect in every way! Mary, though sinless, was not perfect. Sin and perfection are two things. Furthermore, to fulfill what the OT had said, the Son (male) of David would be the one. Mary was neither male, nor was she related to David. Matt. 1: “16 Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, (9) who is called the Messiah.” ***********************************

Point me to one single verse in the bible that shows that Mary never sinned. I have already shown you verses. To refresh your memory -

Romans 9:23 - "All have sinned, and all have fallen short of the glory of God."

Rom. 5:12 - "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that F18 all have sinned."

And yes I had a look at that link you pointed me to, questioning the meaning of the word translated as all, and citing Enoch who was raptured, as an example. Actually, this is a weakly constructed argument at best. The fact that Enoch was raptured cannot and will not help you in this argument. You yourselves have sinned, and yet you expect to be raptured if u don't die first, correct ? Well here these are both examples of those who have sinned and yet escape death. Now, why is your argument weak ? Because of the term In Adam. We see that Enoch was "walking with God". This is a type of being found In Christ. Actually Christ is God, so the fact that Enoch was walking with God, shows he was walking with Christ. This is being in Christ. One cannot walk with God if they are walking according to their natural fallen human life. To walk with God, one needs to deny His natural life, hence Jesus said "If anyone wants to come after me, let Him deny himself, take up his cross and follow me." Enoch wasn't just raptured for any reason. God's word is teaching us something here. The OT uses a lot of typology, get used to it. Hence we have the following verse : 1 Cor 15:22: "As in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive". It is a hope and encouragement to us saints who await the rapture.

We must however realise that even though Enoch did walk with God, He most certainly would have sinned before hand, this is an inevitable result of being joined to Adam. We actually see that Christ Himself BECAME sin on our behalf.

On that website you gave me the link to I read the following statement from the web-author : "What would be irrefutable would be a verse that read something like: "absolutely every human being who ever lived no exceptions - has sinned......" "

Of course you are not going to find a verse that is written exactly the way you have written, that's ridiculous, but I managed to dig up this verse easily enough : "There is none that doeth good, no not one." - Romans 3:12

This verse is absolutely clear. NONE doeth good, no NOT ONE !!!! Do you need anything clearer than that or are you going to twist that one also ?

Now this is God's speaking, so He would obviously not refer to Himself.

The problem is the Catholic faith do not realise the significance of Jesus' death on the cross. It was in that act of complete and perfect sacrifice on behalf of sinners that the old creation, Adam had been terminated.

Until that point, the old creation had not yet been dealt with. However, Catholic teaching would have us believe that Mary was preserved especially by God to be sinless before the sin offering had taken place. You need to thoroughly understand all the types presented to us in the OT. If you do not understand these types, you cannot appreciate what I am telling you. The principle given to us especially in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers, is that a sin offering MUST be made in order for man to be blameless. And do you know what ? I have a proof that Mary made a sin offering. Do you know what sin Mary committed ? I bet this has got your attention now. You might in fact be suprised to know that it was in fact a sin to conceive a firstborn male. Are you suprised ? Take a look at this :

And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord; (As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;) And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons. - LUKE 2:22-24

Now let us look at what it says in the book of Leviticus...

Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean. - LEVITICUS 12:2

And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest: Who shall offer it before the LORD, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female. And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean. - LEVITICUS 12:6-8

Take a good read. If you missed it, go over it again. What kind of offerings did Mary present ? Two types actually, a burnt offering and a sin offering.

But wait a minute ! How can it be a sin to conceive a firstborn male-child ? Actually, if you're asking this question, you haven't understood the significance of what I mentioned earlier. Jesus became a sin on our behalf. Mary sinned, and Jesus Himself was the sin. Btw, don't be offended at my saying that Jesus was the sin. Pauls epistle to the Corinthians confirms exactly this.

"God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." (2 Corinthians 5:21)

So while Jesus Himself never sinned (Mary did to bring Him fourth), He became sin for us. I think this verse from 2nd corinthians is one of the most precious verses in the entire bible, as it shows God's masterful handiwork to turn sin into our righteousness. How much of a shame is that to Satan !!

Do you marvel at God's economy ? When I used to read leviticus, I used to wonder why are there all these different types of offerings ? We can really see that there is more to God's plan than we initially think.

And we can see also that Christ Himself is called the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. The lamb was by God's ordination the animal of choice to make expiation for sins.

Romans 8:3,4 - For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

If Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh, where did this sinful flesh come from ? We have the incorruptible Spirit of God who went into Mary. Surely the sinful flesh came not from the Holy Spirit.

The sinful flesh obviously came from the one who was still joined to the old creation of Adam, Mary. You see, either you are in the old creation or in the new creation, there is no in-between. While Catholics might like to believe you can have a bit of sin here and no sin there, it is absolutely unscriptural. You see, the bible is very clear concerning Jesus Christ becoming a sin. He did not prevent the Father's will from being carried out, had He done so, He would not have accomplished our redemption. Christ fully bore our sin and received the Father's judgement. Christ died for Mary's sins and all of fallen Adam. That is why He was termed as the last Adam. He effectively ended the old creation.

So, as Firstborn over all creation, He became Firstborn from among the dead, and through His resurrection, bringing many sons back into glory with Him, He became Firstborn among many brothers.

Isn't God's eternal economy so unsearchable rich and wonderful ?

When we take a look at the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception as stated in the Catholic Encyclopedia, it states :

". . .was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin. . ." The formal active essence of original sin was not removed from her soul, as it is removed from others by baptism; it was excluded, it never was in her soul. Simultaneously with the exclusion of sin. The state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam -- from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death.

Do you believe this or do you believe that Mary made a sin offering ? One of these is stated explicitly in the bible and the other is not. I leave it up to you to choose.

*********************************************** There is no proof either way. But you would agree that Baptism is symbolic of our “burying of our natural, fallen life…”. Therefore, since Baptism is symbolic, why would one need literally to be submerged? ***********************************************

No proof either way ? Ok let's see, what different types of water baptism are practised in Christianity ? There's 3 I can think of - Sprinkling, Pouring, and Immersion. Does one go down into the water to be sprinkled or poured ? Does one come up out of the water after being sprinkled or poured ? Let us suppose you perform a sprinkling in your church. How does one go down into the water ? How does one come up out of the water ? Also for pouring, how can this be achieved? Please don't use the argument about going down doesn't mean fully going into the water. What are you going to do just stand in the water ? Is standing-in-water baptism practised in any churches ? Read your Catholic doctine, even u should know that the Catholic church allows 3 types of baptisms - sprinkling, pouring, and immersion. If you are having doubts about immersion, then you might like to tell His Holiness the Pope that you want Him to remove the doctrine.

Given that baptsim by immersion is shown several times in the bible, but not even 1 instance of pouring or sprinkling, it is up to u to tell me what basis it has.

"Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins"

Now why on Earth would all these people come to the Jordan river to be sprinkled ? or poured ? Can you imagine how it would look ? All these people coming to this massive river, all queuing up and then just have some water sprinkled on them ? Notice also in this verse it actually explains what takes place in the baptism - these people were confessing their sins. I wonder if an infant can do that.

**************************************************** To this I would refer you to the Old Testament “Baptism” which was circumcision. You will note that ALL those elders who were to become a part of God’s covenant had to profess belief first and then be circumcised. But you will agree that the Law was for the INFANT to be circumcised 8 days after birth! How could an day old profess belief. So you see that it was the Parents belief for the infant, which allowed the infant to be a part of God’s people. ****************************************************

Circumcision is completely different because it's not now a case of the parent WANTING to be a part of God's people. They ALREADY WERE God's people, and as such, they were bound by God's laws and ordinances, one of which was the circumcision. Now we are in the age of grace, the ordinances have been abolished, there is no circumcision or uncircumsion. Jesus however gives clear instruction that one must be baptised of water and spirit to enter into the Kingdom of the Heavens. But what is this age of grace all about ? Well, superficially speaking we are freed from the law, more intrisically we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. It is with the faith of each individual that they take this step to publically declare their belief in Jesus Christ to be allowed entrance into the Kingdom of the Heavens.

***************************************** What point did circumcision have for the House of David, many of whom did evil in the sight of the Lord!? What point does Baptism have on one who says they believe, but really do not? What point did Baptism have for Judas? In conformance with your last statement, Baptism then really means nothing! Because even a professed believer can become an unbeliever at which point if he/she continues in their evil path may not be saved though they had been Baptized. Baptism isn’t a guarantee that the individual will be saved! Baptism is a symbol of one’s dying to death and rising to life in the Body of Christ– which even an infant has a right to. Jesus said, “Let the children come to me, for it is the Kingdom of Heaven that belongs to them”. Since it is the Kingdom that belongs to them, who are we to deny them that very symbol which mysteriously brings them into the Body of Christ? ***********************************************

What point did circumcision have ? The point was that if you were one of God's chosen people, and you were under the law, you were bound by that law. They couldn't just decide to do what they like, e.g. commit adultery, they'd be stoned ! The children of Israel were already ordained by God through His covenant with Abraham. You ask who are we to deny them. Actually, to say this is pointless. Salvation does not come without faith. If you baptise one and there is no faith, then it is fruitless. Also, by bringing in people to the church who are not genuine believers you are just like the one who planted tares among the wheat. And we know what will happen to the tares, they will be burnt like chaff. The bible is very clear concerning this. Just like paying people to be baptised into the church would be equally wrong. You might have a large number, but you'll end up with tares in amongst the wheat. Regarding your comments about Judas, actually you will find that God actually ordained that He betray Jesus. I am not going to be one who judges what the final destiny is of Judas, it's not my place to do so. What point does Baptism have ? Baptism is a testimony to the church that one repents and declares their belief in Jesus as their Saviour. In this way, the other believers can have fellowship with them, for what fellowship does light have with darkness ? Of course, there'll always be those who never really do believe and yet get baptised. Of these people, the baptism is of no effect because they are obviously not born again. We cannot prevent this from happening, only the Lord knows who all the wheat are and who all the tares are. For us, we are commanded not to uproot the tares lest we perhaps damage the wheat.

*********************************************** Furthermore, the Catholic Church has another Sacrament which as its name suggests Confirms the person in their belief. This Confirmation is a likening to Pentecost when the Apostles, who had been Baptized, where then confirmed in the Holy Spirit. ***********************************************

The day of Pentecost must have been a glorious day indeed ! How I would have loved to see the 120 saints pray together in one accord. It certainly woulda been something ! 8-) The thing is that on this day, indeed they had the pouring of the Holy Spirit and began to speak in many tounges, but this was merely a continuation of their ongoing faith. However, the principle shown in the bible is that once you are saved, you are eternally saved. Why is this ? It is because Christ is the good Shepherd. If a sheep does wander, He leaves the 99 behind and searches, and doesn't stop until it is found. Therefore if one is lost in the coming age, they were never saved to begin with. God knows from beginning to end who is saved and who is lost, He doesn't make mistakes.

********************************************** The Lords Church never became corrupt! Jesus said that the gates of Hell would not prevail against it. It was the individuals in the Church that Paul wrote to. There was only One Church at the time, and it was the Catholic Church! It was the individuals inside the Church who began to corrupt. If it were the Church that became corrupt, then how is it that in only a matter of a few decades the Church that Christ founded would corrupt, yet you believe that the church you belong to is not corrupt? ********************************************

It is a commonly known fact that the churches became corrupt. Would you deny that the selling of indulgences ever took place ? Would you deny that there were ever any bad popes ? Even if we don't want to admit any such things, let us take a look at the conditions of churches that the Apostle Paul wrote to:

Galatians 1:6-7 -

6 I marvel that you are so quickly removing from Him who has called you in the grace of Christ to a different gospel,

7 Which is not another gospel, only there are some who troule you and desire to pevert the gospel of Christ.

1 Corinthians 1:10-14

10 Now I beseech you, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing and that there be no divisions among you, but that you speak the same thing and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be attuned in the same mind and in the same opinion. 11 For it has been made clear to me concerning you, my brothers, by those of the household of Chloe, that there are strifes among you. 12 Now I mean this, that each of you says, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ. 13 Is Christ divided ? Was Paul crucified for you ? Or were you baptized into the name of Paul ? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius.

1 Corinthians 3:3 For you are still fleshly. For if there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly and do you not walk according to the manner of man ?

1 Corinthians 4:6-8

6 Now these things brothers, I have transferred in figure to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us the matter of not going beyond what has been written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one, against the other.

7 For who distinguishes you ? And what do you have that you did not receive ? And if you receive it, why do you boast as though not having received it ?

8 Already you are filled; already you have become rich; you have reigned without us. And I would have it indeed that you did reign that we also might reign with you.

1 Corinthians 5:1 It is actually reported that there is fornication among you, and such fornication that does not even occur among the Gentiles, that someone has his stepmother.

1 Corinthians 5:6 Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump ?

1 Corinthians 6:7 Already then it is altogether a defeat to you that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged ? Why not rather be defrauded ?

I think this should be enough evidence to show u that the church did indeed become corrupt. There is of course more but do I really need to exhaust something already so plain to see ?

Also, I myself never claimed "my church" as u put it (actually the whole church is Christ's) was incorruptible. It has indeed made many mistakes, as has been the case throughout Christianity. You asked me when did the early church ever become corrupt, and I have provided you with proof. You on the other hand, as do other Catholics, try to convince me that the Catholic church is the one and only true expression of the body of Christ, and that we should all be subject to the Pope whom you hold to be infallible. That my friend is exclusivism and is entirely contrary to the gospels of Christ.

********************************************************* How is it that you can tell us what Catholicism focuses on, when you are not a Catholic? I, as a Catholic, can tell you that we DO NOT focus on works as a means for salvation. Rather, we focus on works as and indication of one’s faith. We focus on Faith accompanied by good works as an indication of one’s salvation. For no one can tell the other they’ve been saved. Only God knows. Works are all we have to focus on as an indication of faith. Works are the fruit of faith. Can you judge someone’s faith if it is not accompanied by good works? *********************************************************

Perhaps you did not read the first line of this thread. That's ok I won't hold it against u 8-) Now as for salvation by works, I already mentioned the quotes from various Popes regarding salvation only within the Catholic Church. What else can we find ?

"We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff." Pope Boniface VIII

" therefore it is fitting that Divine Wisdom should provide means of salvation for men in the form of certain corporeal and sensible signs which are called sacraments." - Catholic Encyclopedia

************************************************ I have read the Book of Revelations and I falter in finding the connection between the Nico-laitins and Catholics. Can you elaborate on your theory? I have done much homework, and I’m confident that if you do likewise you will find that there is much written about Revelations, which is in conformance with the Catholic Faith. ************************************************

Nico = Victory above/over laitins = common people. Study the words yourself with a Greek dictionary.Clergy-laity system. Catholicism is not alone on this, denominations are just as guilty. God said He hates the works and ways of the Nico-Laitins. Why ? Because they annull the function of the members of the Body of Christ. The Lord hates it when we don't exercise the talents He has given to us. If we bury our talent, then the Lord is not going to be pleased. He is expecting a profit from each of us. Note, this is not regarding salvation by any means, but it illustrates the ecological problem prevalent in both Catholicism and Protestential Denominationalism. Without the functioning of all the members, Christ's body cannot be built up properly. Yes some are teachers, some are evangelists, some are Sherpherds, what is the purpose ? That we can build up one another. Paul says each one has a teaching, each one has a psalm, a tounge. He says he desires ALL men to prophesy, one by one, instead of having a small number of ppl taking care of all the functioning while the rest just sit there as pew warmers. Do you know the Lord hates lukewarmness ? This was his rebuke to the church in Laodicia as seen in Revelation. We all need to be burning in spirit, serving the Lord.

"The latter verse you referred to can also be used against all the Protestant theologies. I would appreciate a list of the “impure teachings” that you are referring to. And the fact that one cannot assume something to be true if it is not scriptural is just plain ignorant. If the Holy Spirit can preserve a perishable Book for hundreds of years, then why is it you fail to believe that the Holy Spirit can preserve oral Tradition?"

I believe God's intended way of presenting His word was through the bible. Let us see what Paul has to say in 1 Corinthians 4:6

6 Now these things brothers, I have transferred in figure to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us the matter of not going beyond what has been written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one, against the other.

The Catholic faith as one user put it, is evolving. Bits are always being added to it according to what the Pope has to say at the time. Then going by what the Pope says, it in turn becomes the true doctrine of the church. This goes right against 4:6 The Pope can say whatever He wants and Catholics will bow their heads and just say Amen. They accept man's traditions to a pervertedly high level. You think traditions of men are to be trusted ?

"neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men." (Mark 7:8)

"and why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?" (Matthew 15:3)

"thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that." (Mark 7:13)

"Beware that no one carries you off as spoil through his philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ." - Colossians 2:8

I base my faith upon God's word in the bible than traditions of men, or speaking of a human elected Pontiff. What more do I need than the bible, and the Holy Spirit to guide me in His word ?

"You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free." - John 8:32

I know that I am saved. I know that Jesus saved me. I know that I need not submit to the Pope to be saved, I know that I need not practise the sacriments to be saved. Christ died for me that I could live not by my fallen, corrupt life, but by the divine life which empowers me to do all things. **************************************************** I did not exclude all believers who don’t meet as the Catholic Church. Several Popes have written on this subject: Salvation outside the Church. ****************************************************

Read the quotes from popes I have pasted. Would u tell me that some popes disagree with those popes ? Surely not ! Surely the Vicar of Christ in his great holiness and infallibility could not err. Surely the one to whom all Catholics are to be subject couldn't teach them a false teaching, could they ?

******************************************************* This is a simple confusion of words. To pray means to ask. So we ask Mary to ask Jesus (i.e. We pray to Mary to pray for us). In the same way when I ASK you to pray for me, what I am doing is PRAYING to you to pray for me. We NEVER pray to Mary to grant us our petition, like we do to Jesus. Mary is NOT God. The Catholic Church knows this! I will say it again, Mary is NOT God. Nor do we elevate her anywhere near God. Mary is just like you and I, human, yet without sin. WE DO NOT PRAY TO HER LIKE ONE PRAYS TO GOD. We simply ask Mary to pray (intercede) for us. *******************************************************

There certainly is a simple confusion in words, and you will find nowhere, absolutely nowhere in the bible where anyone prays TO anyone but God. You think you can pray to me ? Go right ahead 8-) I'm waiting for ya 8-) I can pray FOR you, you can pray FOR me. I cannot pray TO you, you cannot pray TO me. Simple as that.

*********************************************** In the definition of prayer, YES. If Mary was amongst the Churches to which Paul wrote, then Paul asked (prayed) her to pray for him. ***********************************************

Isn't it funny how Mary's name is never mentioned in any of Paul's Epistles ? Also in His greetings to the church, He never declares a greeting to Peter. Peter was in fact rebuked by Paul for His hypocrisy. Do you think that were Peter really to be the first Pope, Paul would rebuke the Vicar of Christ ? So many claims made by the Catholic Church for supremacy, so little substance in their proofs.

As for Peter being called a rock, so what, He told us "You yourselves also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house into a holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." So Peter was called a rock ? So are we ! If that makes Peter a Pope then I guess we're all Popes. How quaint. Absurd isn't it ? Yet this is what the Papacy is built on. *************************************************** The “fine flour” , which is your church? *************************************************** Fine flour is pure teaching. It comes only by the Holy Spirit through the word of God.

**************************************************** Then it was likewise sickening that Moses could “soften” Gods heart against his people. Several times did the Israelites go to Moses and ASK (PRAY) that he would Pray for them to God. If Moses could calm God’s wrath against the Israelites, then I’d be willing to bet that Mary, the Mother of Jesus, could calm his wrath against us. ****************************************************

In Moses time, the Israelites were subject to the law. As such, full salvation through Jesus Christ had not come yet. Moses spoke according to the promise Jehovah promised His people that He would multiply their seed. Jehovah could not go against His word, that would make Him a liar. So here it was perfectly acceptable for Moses to speak this truth to Jehovah. In the case of Jesus Christ, He has already fulfilled the role of salvation and redemption, hence why He stated on the cross "It is finished." I want you to ponder those words - it is finished. That means His work was complete to accomplish redemption for God's people. To pray to Mary to act as one who will cause our Saviour to be more merciful is an abomination to say the least. That's to say Jesus has not fulfilled His role to as a Saviour to an adequate degree. In taking such a position, you completely miss the knowledge surpassing love of Christ. Again, when the adulterous woman was brought to Jesus, He did not condemn her. He knew the words to speak to the Pharasees to pierce their hearts. Don't think the Lord Jesus isn't merciful enough.

Hebrews 4:15 - For we do not have a High Priest who cannot e touched with the feeling of our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all respects like us, yet without sin.

***************************************************** What level is this? She certainly is above you! Because Jesus said, even the least in heaven is greater than the greatest on earth! We don’t, however, liken her to God, as you seem to presume falsely. *****************************************************

Ephesians 2:6 - And raised us up together with Hin and seated us together with Him in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus.

Thus, we who are in Christ Jesus, are greater than those not in Christ Jesus. Why ? Because it is Christ in us who is the treasure within us earthen vessels.

****************************************************** Ehem! You didn’t hear that she gave birth to Jesus. I’d say that was a pretty big THING in the gospel. Not to mention she raised Jesus and was at his side for 33 years ******************************************************

This was the writer's response to my statement that I never see anything in the bible about Mary saving anyone. There is absolutely no saving anyone by Mary in this either. Raising up the Saviour as an earthly mother does, and being at his side does not make HER save anybody. Mary saved NOONE.

**************************************************** I’m trying to keep up with your train of thoughts here. Can you elaborate on how specifically the Hail Mary is “way off base” seeing as thought it is Scriptural. And also tell us how we should pray the Our Father “in Jesus name”, as we surely do not according to you. “"Christ is the only way to the Father.*" ****************************************************

Mary is not God. This prayer you pray to her is a worshipping and glorifying prayer. It's like if I was to pray "Hail Mother Theresa, you are blessed and pure and holy,you are so wonderful..." Did you ever see Jesus EVER pray to ANYONE but the Father ? Again, lack of biblical evidence shows up again. Why does this always happen with Catholic doctrines ? It is because you follow man's traditions, which are warned against.

********************************************************* That was my point, as you seemed to have missed. Since we DO NOT know the actual birth date of our Lord, we picked December 25th to celebrate. Do you not celebrate the Holy and Most Sacred Birth of our Redeemer? If so, please let us know on which day, so that we may be corrected. Or do you not celebrate it at all for fear that the date you pick might unintentionally fall on a pegan holiday?

***************************************************** The fact is we're celebrating the birth of Jesus on a day that's not His day. Furthermore Christmas has become an utterly commercialised holiday and is more about kids getting presents. Easter has turned into a chocolate fiesta. Why marry ourselves to the world ? What fellowship does light have with darkness ? These things are an abomination to our dear Lord. Again, it is a tradition of men. The Lord doesn't like it, so we also should not like it.

***************************************************** Not so. Was this written about Jesus or was this Jesus talking to his Apostles? In Luke 21:16 Jesus is saying this about his disciples not about himself! And because he was talking to the Apostles he could include “parents, and relatives” without referring to his own parents. In any case, it is also written, “Anyone who obeys my Father in heaven is my brother, sister, and mother!” And in is written that Jesus was the Son of David – but he wasn’t really his son! Therefore, we are to understand this to mean relatives and close (Matthew 12:50)

*****************************************************

I'm glad you brought up this verse because if you look at the verses directly before it, it can be shown, without excuse, that Jesus' family are spoken of. Let's take a look...

12:46 While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.

which bretheren are these being referred to ? It definately cannot be referring to all the disciples there as the "Bretheren" cos they're covered a few verses

12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.

Cousins ? You really really wanna hold this to mean cousins ? Let's see how it would sound...

12:48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?

Who is my mother ? and who are my cousins ? You really think so ? 8-) Of course I don't blame u, you're devout Catholics, you couldn't possibly allow it to mean brothers. That would crumble so many of the doctrines you hold to be true.

12:49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

Behold my mother and my cousins ! Sorry, I don't buy it. 8-)

12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

******************************************************** Then how is it written that Christ said to Peter, “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my CHURCH”. Which Church was he referring to. Since all churches believe different things, which one is correct. I pose to you the unchangeable truth that the Catholic Church is that very Church Christ built on Peter ***********************************************************

Again, the word church comes from the Greek word ekklesia meaning called out ones. There were no names for the churches mentioned in the bible, the all were just called the church in Philedelphia, the church in Corinth etc. As for the church being built on Peter, I have already addressed this above.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), October 31, 2002