Is the roman catholic church commiting idolatry?

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]Ok well i don't see anyone worshiping the tree by decking it with silver and gold...Easter is the worship of Christ's resurrection and mother of God is Mary...Xx_Hopeless_xX

But the point is that Christmas is a heathen traditions, and the Bible specifically speaks against such traditions, whether or not it is a form of worship. Easter is the celebration of the goddess of the same name. These are pagan rituals which were incorporated into the Catholic Church (against Biblical doctrine) in order to bring more worshippers in. All the Catholics did was replace the central figures.

Catholics also venerate Mary as having a part in mans redemption, and this is not so. Mary is sinful and dead just like everyone else, and they all sleep until the ressurrection. If Mary had no Sin, then we'd have no need for a savoir because she would be it. She isn't, and she herself confessed her need for a savior.

Mary did not ascend into heaven. If this were so it would be Biblical: it isn't. Only one person who has walked the Earth is in Heaven, and that is Christ. Everyone else is dead and sleeping.

Romans 3:23 says "All have sinned", and this included Mary.

Verse 48, speaking of herself, she said God, her Savior, had "regarded the lowly state of His maidservant"

The last reference in the Bible to Mary is:

All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.

"Queen of heaven" was a title of the mother goddess, who was worshiped centuries before Mary was born (see Jeremiah 7:17–20).

That kind of pagan worship was transferred to Mary down through the centuries as Marian devotion and worship evolved. To provide biblical justification for the teaching, the Catholic Church presents Mary as the spiritual mother of all, "the new Eve," based on Paul's statements to the Corinthians relating to Jesus, whom Paul characterized as the new Adam (1 Corinthians 15:22). The attempt to connect Mary with Eve in the same way that Paul connects Christ with Adam is flawed, however, in that Eve was Adam's wife, not his mother.

The idea of Mary as a sinless and holy mother figure, exempt from the penalty of death, culminated in 1950 when Pope Pius XII proclaimed that her body had seen no corruption but had been taken to heaven. At the heart of such a belief is the teaching that the soul is immortal. A careful reading of the Scriptures, however, reveals that the soul is mortal and is not conscious after death (Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10).

For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward, for the memory of them is forgotten.

The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence.

Mary is in Sheol (The Grave) awaiting ressurrection just like everyone else who is dead in Christ.

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I don't see any scriptural support for your argument here.....

LJS9502_basic

I'll make it simple for you: Christians aren't suppose to participate in the celebrations and traditions of man. We're suppose to be 'apart from the world'. That's why it says in the verse above that the traditions of man are vain. Early Christians didn't even celebrate birthdays!

Following a heathen tradition by 'going through the motiions' is just as much blasphemey as actually worshipping heathen gods. That's what that verse is about...DON'T FOLLOW THEIR TRADITIONS!

Mary did not ascend into heaven. If this were so it would be Biblical: it isn't. br0kenrabbit

[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"][QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

But the point is that Christmas is a heathen traditions, and the Bible specifically speaks against such traditions, whether or not it is a form of worship. Easter is the celebration of the goddess of the same name. These are pagan rituals which were incorporated into the Catholic Church (against Biblical doctrine) in order to bring more worshippers in. All the Catholics did was replace the central figures.

Catholics also venerate Mary as having a part in mans redemption, and this is not so. Mary is sinful and dead just like everyone else, and they all sleep until the ressurrection. If Mary had no Sin, then we'd have no need for a savoir because she would be it. She isn't, and she herself confessed her need for a savior.

br0kenrabbit

Mary did not ascend into heaven. If this were so it would be Biblical: it isn't. Only one person who has walked the Earth is in Heaven, and that is Christ. Everyone else is dead and sleeping.

Romans 3:23 says "All have sinned", and this included Mary.

Verse 48, speaking of herself, she said God, her Savior, had "regarded the lowly state of His maidservant"

The last reference in the Bible to Mary is:

All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.

"Queen of heaven" was a title of the mother goddess, who was worshiped centuries before Mary was born (see Jeremiah 7:17–20).

That kind of pagan worship was transferred to Mary down through the centuries as Marian devotion and worship evolved. To provide biblical justification for the teaching, the Catholic Church presents Mary as the spiritual mother of all, "the new Eve," based on Paul's statements to the Corinthians relating to Jesus, whom Paul characterized as the new Adam (1 Corinthians 15:22). The attempt to connect Mary with Eve in the same way that Paul connects Christ with Adam is flawed, however, in that Eve was Adam's wife, not his mother.

The idea of Mary as a sinless and holy mother figure, exempt from the penalty of death, culminated in 1950 when Pope Pius XII proclaimed that her body had seen no corruption but had been taken to heaven. At the heart of such a belief is the teaching that the soul is immortal. A careful reading of the Scriptures, however, reveals that the soul is mortal and is not conscious after death (Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10).

For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward, for the memory of them is forgotten.

The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence.

Mary is in Sheol (The Grave) awaiting ressurrection just like everyone else who is dead in Christ.

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]Catholics sure condemn (and used to burn) other people for being idolatrous, so why should we throw our hands when it comes to the Catholics themselves? And by Catholics I mean the institution, the Church, all gilded in Gold (stolen gold, most gold in Catholic churches was taken from the New World).

And the oldest form of Christianity is not Catholisism, its Jewish Christianity, which I adhere to more than any other form of Christianity.

The Catholic Church didn't take its current form until the Byzantine Empire, and then it was (and is) mostly a political institition.

foxhound_fox

I am talking about the institution of the Catholic Church, and you're right about the Catholic Church being the first to 'organize' but that's the whole point: Christianity isn't suppose to be 'organized' under hierarchy as such. We have one Father, not many. Priests are believers, not people who refuse to marry so they can preach. A Church is a congregation, not a building.

Christianity as worship predates the Catholic Church by centuries. It's this form of worship that the reformation intended to return to, not invent. Indeed, the problems of the Catholic Church stem from the very fact that it is a political hiearchy that is uncessary and uneeded for faith. That's my whole point: It's a political institution in the gise of religion. That's why they feel so free to incorporate the practices of other religions (which are pagan according to the scirpures the church claims to abide by), because their primary purpose is order and control, not salvation.

No, Easter is about Ishtar. Christmas, or more specifically December 25th, is about Sol Invictus (the Roman sun god), or any other pagan equivalent.73X

I don't know where you are getting your information from..not from a Catholic source though..it's one of the most commonly known things in the Catholic faith... "The Assumption is the oldest feast day of Our Lady, but we don't know how it first came to be celebrated. "... "The Assumption completes God's work in her since it was not fitting that the flesh that had given life to God himself should ever undergo corruption. The Assumption is God's crowning of His work as Mary ends her earthly life and enters eternity. The feast turns our eyes in that direction, where we will follow when our earthly life is over." "The prayer for the feast(feast of the assumption) reads: "All-powerful and ever-living God: You raised the sinless Virgin Mary, mother of your Son, body and soul, to the glory of heaven. May we see heaven as our final goal and come to share her glory." http://www.ewtn.com/library/answers/aofmary.htmXx_Hopeless_xX

Right, that is a tenet of Catholic faith...not Christian Faith. NONE OF THAT is in the Bible. The Bible says all men sin, the Bible says 'no man does good, no not one.' If Mary were without sin, she would neither need a savoir nor would the Bible say that all but Christ (because he is God) is without sin.

The reason Mary herself professed a need for salvation is because she was born into sin just as all other men. If Mary did not sin, we would have a dualogy of savoirs: Mary and Christ.

Only Christ playes a role in the redemption of men. Mary is as mortal and sinful as all other men, and this is what you will get from THE BIBLE. The other beliefs are cathecisms, which are not Biblical at all.

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I The Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me; And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love Me, and keep My Commandments"

There's a reason the Bible doesn't tell us what Christ looks like: He doesn't want people worshipping an image, even of him. The Catholics think the cross is a proxy, but it isn't.

How many times have you heard people say "I worship at the foot of the cross?" I don't, I worship at the foot of my savior.

foxhound_fox

No, Easter is about Ishtar. Christmas, or more specifically December 25th, is about Sol Invictus (the Roman sun god), or any other pagan equivalent.73X

They just used the same dates as those celebrations on purpose. That doesnt mean they are the same. I dont even have to mention that.

[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"] I don't know where you are getting your information from..not from a Catholic source though..it's one of the most commonly known things in the Catholic faith... "The Assumption is the oldest feast day of Our Lady, but we don't know how it first came to be celebrated. "... "The Assumption completes God's work in her since it was not fitting that the flesh that had given life to God himself should ever undergo corruption. The Assumption is God's crowning of His work as Mary ends her earthly life and enters eternity. The feast turns our eyes in that direction, where we will follow when our earthly life is over." "The prayer for the feast(feast of the assumption) reads: "All-powerful and ever-living God: You raised the sinless Virgin Mary, mother of your Son, body and soul, to the glory of heaven. May we see heaven as our final goal and come to share her glory." http://www.ewtn.com/library/answers/aofmary.htmbr0kenrabbit

Right, that is a tenet of Catholic faith...not Christian Faith. NONE OF THAT is in the Bible. The Bible says all men sin, the Bible says 'no man does good, no not one.' If Mary were without sin, she would neither need a savoir nor would the Bible say that all but Christ (because he is God) is without sin.

The reason Mary herself professed a need for salvation is because she was born into sin just as all other men. If Mary did not sin, we would have a dualogy of savoirs: Mary and Christ.

Only Christ playes a role in the redemption of men. Mary is as mortal and sinful as all other men, and this is what you will get from THE BIBLE. The other beliefs are cathecisms, which are not Biblical at all.

[QUOTE="73X"] No, Easter is about Ishtar. Christmas, or more specifically December 25th, is about Sol Invictus (the Roman sun god), or any other pagan equivalent.LJS9502_basic

Christ was most probably born in the Spring (as that's when the Romans took taxes, which is why Mary was in Bethleham). Christmas is nothing more than the catholics incorporating pagans into their flock so they wouldn't have to give up their traditions. Christmas is not a christian celebration.

There's ONLY ONE celebration the Bible asks Christians to observe, and that's 'The Lords Supper'.

[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"] I don't know where you are getting your information from..not from a Catholic source though..it's one of the most commonly known things in the Catholic faith... "The Assumption is the oldest feast day of Our Lady, but we don't know how it first came to be celebrated. "... "The Assumption completes God's work in her since it was not fitting that the flesh that had given life to God himself should ever undergo corruption. The Assumption is God's crowning of His work as Mary ends her earthly life and enters eternity. The feast turns our eyes in that direction, where we will follow when our earthly life is over." "The prayer for the feast(feast of the assumption) reads: "All-powerful and ever-living God: You raised the sinless Virgin Mary, mother of your Son, body and soul, to the glory of heaven. May we see heaven as our final goal and come to share her glory." http://www.ewtn.com/library/answers/aofmary.htmbr0kenrabbit

Right, that is a tenet of Catholic faith...not Christian Faith. NONE OF THAT is in the Bible. The Bible says all men sin, the Bible says 'no man does good, no not one.' If Mary were without sin, she would neither need a savoir nor would the Bible say that all but Christ (because he is God) is without sin.

The reason Mary herself professed a need for salvation is because she was born into sin just as all other men. If Mary did not sin, we would have a dualogy of savoirs: Mary and Christ.

Only Christ playes a role in the redemption of men. Mary is as mortal and sinful as all other men, and this is what you will get from THE BIBLE. The other beliefs are cathecisms, which are not Biblical at all.

[...] because their primary purpose is order and control, not salvation.br0kenrabbit

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] But the celebration is NOT heathen. When attempting to convert people..it's a good idea to give them something else to celebrate and NOT just take away a holiday from them.

And no..Catholics don't believe Mary has a part in mans redemption. That would be Jesus. As for sin....I don't think anyone here can answer that. Not that is the important aspect of her character anyway.

hartsickdiscipl

Jeremiah 10:2-4: "Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not." (KJV).

It is Scripture evidence and oldest Church tradition which tell us about Mary's involvement in Redemption: as mother of Jesus and Theotokos, as disciple of her Son and associate in his salvific work. Maria Assumpta is forever an active part in the ongoing history of salvation. This is the reason why we turn to her for encouragement (she is the mother of all) and help (she is our model in faith).

I don't see how that scripture supports the use of a statue of Mary in Christian worship.

That wasn't even the topic I was discussing.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="73X"] No, Easter is about Ishtar. Christmas, or more specifically December 25th, is about Sol Invictus (the Roman sun god), or any other pagan equivalent.br0kenrabbit

Christ was most probably born in the Spring (as that's when the Romans took taxes, which is why Mary was in Bethleham). Christmas is nothing more than the catholics incorporating pagans into their flock so they wouldn't have to give up their traditions. Christmas is not a christian celebration.

There's ONLY ONE celebration the Bible asks Christians to observe, and that's 'The Lords Supper'.

Yeah sure...lol

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"][...] because their primary purpose is order and control, not salvation.foxhound_fox

Here's what I condemn the Catholics for: Not knowing their Bible.

In the Churches I have attended, everyone reads the Bible, not just the pastor. In the Churches I have attended, the congregation meets and decides on the tenents of that particular church (such as varying attitutes toward divorce and remarriage), not one Pope. In the Churches I have attended, people are asked to submit (pray) before and to God, not before Mary, St. Sebastian, St. Andrew, St. Peter and so on.

If people read and knew their Bible (and by knew I mean even going back to the original languages to understand what exactly is being said, no translation of The Bible is perfect) then I could appreciate their views more. Instead, Catholics are more like "The Church says this so it is so, even if it isn't in the Bible."

Basically, I see the Catholic insitution as a hypocritical one, and the catholic congregation as an uneducated (scriptually) one.

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Nope. Not to a Christian it's not. Weren't we talking about Christians? I know of no such Christian that celebrates Easter for Ishtar nor Christmas for the Roman Sun God.:|

LJS9502_basic

Christ was most probably born in the Spring (as that's when the Romans took taxes, which is why Mary was in Bethleham). Christmas is nothing more than the catholics incorporating pagans into their flock so they wouldn't have to give up their traditions. Christmas is not a christian celebration.

There's ONLY ONE celebration the Bible asks Christians to observe, and that's 'The Lords Supper'.

Because: Jeremiah 10:2-4: "Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen,"

Christians AREN'T SUPPOSE TO PARTICIPATE in celebrations as such. Again, here's the full verse, it's saying DON'T DO THAT!

Jeremiah 10:2-4: "Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not."

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"][...] because their primary purpose is order and control, not salvation.br0kenrabbit

Here's what I condemn the Catholics for: Not knowing their Bible.

In the Churches I have attended, everyone reads the Bible, not just the pastor. In the Churches I have attended, the congregation meets and decides on the tenents of that particular church (such as varying attitutes toward divorce and remarriage), not one Pope. In the Churches I have attended, people are asked to submit (pray) before and to God, not before Mary, St. Sebastian, St. Andrew, St. Peter and so on.

If people read and knew their Bible (and by knew I mean even going back to the original languages to understand what exactly is being said, no translation of The Bible is perfect) then I could appreciate their views more. Instead, Catholics are more like "The Church says this so it is so, even if it isn't in the Bible."

Basically, I see the Catholic insitution as a hypocritical one, and the catholic congregation as an uneducated (scriptually) one.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"][...] because their primary purpose is order and control, not salvation.br0kenrabbit

Here's what I condemn the Catholics for: Not knowing their Bible.

In the Churches I have attended, everyone reads the Bible, not just the pastor. In the Churches I have attended, the congregation meets and decides on the tenents of that particular church (such as varying attitutes toward divorce and remarriage), not one Pope. In the Churches I have attended, people are asked to submit (pray) before and to God, not before Mary, St. Sebastian, St. Andrew, St. Peter and so on.

If people read and knew their Bible (and by knew I mean even going back to the original languages to understand what exactly is being said, no translation of The Bible is perfect) then I could appreciate their views more. Instead, Catholics are more like "The Church says this so it is so, even if it isn't in the Bible."

Basically, I see the Catholic insitution as a hypocritical one, and the catholic congregation as an uneducated (scriptually) one.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

Christ was most probably born in the Spring (as that's when the Romans took taxes, which is why Mary was in Bethleham). Christmas is nothing more than the catholics incorporating pagans into their flock so they wouldn't have to give up their traditions. Christmas is not a christian celebration.

There's ONLY ONE celebration the Bible asks Christians to observe, and that's 'The Lords Supper'.

br0kenrabbit

Because: Jeremiah 10:2-4: "Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen,"

Christians AREN'T SUPPOSE TO PARTICIPATE in celebrations as such. Again, here's the full verse, it's saying DON'T DO THAT!

Jeremiah 10:2-4: "Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not."

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I don't see any scriptural support for your argument here.....

LJS9502_basic

I'll make it simple for you: Christians aren't suppose to participate in the celebrations and traditions of man. We're suppose to be 'apart from the world'. That's why it says in the verse above that the traditions of man are vain. Early Christians didn't even celebrate birthdays!

Following a heathen tradition by 'going through the motiions' is just as much blasphemey as actually worshipping heathen gods. That's what that verse is about...DON'T FOLLOW THEIR TRADITIONS!

Right, that was during the pre-Christian times. Passover became uncessary after Christs death because our promised land in no longer on this Earth since Christ was rejected as King of the Earth.

[...] because their primary purpose is order and control, not salvation.br0kenrabbit

Anyway, in regard to Peter...Matthew 16 13-20 "You are 'Rock,' and on this rock I will build My Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."LJS9502_basic

Here is some commentary on that.

"Matthew 16:17, 18 Our Lord pronounced a blessing on Simon, son of Jonah. The fisherman had not arrived at this concept of the Lord Jesus through intellect or native wisdom; it had been supernaturally revealed to him by God the Father. But the Son had something important to say to Peter also. So Jesus added, "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it." We all know that more controversy has swirled around this verse than almost any other verse in the Gospel. The question is, "Who or what is the rock?" Part of the problem arises from the fact that the Greek words for Peter and for rock are similar, but the meanings are different. The first, petros, means a stone or loose rock; the second, petra, means rock, such as a rocky ledge. So what Jesus really said was " ... you are Peter (stone), and on this rock I will build My church." He did not say He would build His church on a stone but on a rock.

If Peter is not the rock, then what is? If we stick to the context, the obvious answer is that the rock is Peter's confession that Christ is the Son of the living God, the truth on which the church is founded. Eph_2:20 teaches that the church is built on Jesus Christ, the chief cornerstone. Its statement that we are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets refers not to them, but to the foundation laid in their teachings concerning the Lord Jesus Christ.
Christ is spoken of as a Rock in 1Co 10:4. In this connection, Morgan gives a helpful reminder:

Remember, He was talking to Jews. If we trace the figurative use of the word rock through Hebrew Scriptures, we find that it is never used symbolically of man, but always of God. So here at Caesarea Philippi, it is not upon Peter that the Church is built. Jesus did not trifle with figures of speech. He took up their old Hebrew illustration—rock, always the symbol of Deity—and said, "Upon God Himself —Christ, the Son of the living God—I will build my church."
Peter never spoke of himself as the foundation of the church. Twice he referred to Christ as a Stone (Act 4:11-12; 1Pe 2:4-8 ), but then the figure is different; the stone is the head of the corner, not the foundation."

source: Bible Believers Commentary

Right, that was during the pre-Christian times. Passover became uncessary after Christs death because our promised land in no longer on this Earth since Christ was rejected as King of the Earth.

br0kenrabbit

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]None of which disproves what that days mean to Christians. Your point then is....what?

LJS9502_basic

Because: Jeremiah 10:2-4: "Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen,"

Christians AREN'T SUPPOSE TO PARTICIPATE in celebrations as such. Again, here's the full verse, it's saying DON'T DO THAT!

Jeremiah 10:2-4: "Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not."

Christian teachings include both the OT and the NT. The NT freed us from the law of the OT, but the law isn't every command, the law is the law of Moses: the 10 commandments. That doesn't mean we shouldn't follow the 10 commands, we should, but we aren't going to hell because we fail to live up to them because Christ lived up to them for us. But they're still something you should adhere to as a Christian.

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

Right, that was during the pre-Christian times. Passover became uncessary after Christs death because our promised land in no longer on this Earth since Christ was rejected as King of the Earth.

LJS9502_basic

You're missing a noun and a verb.

Here's what I condemn the Catholics for: Not knowing their Bible.

In the Churches I have attended, everyone reads the Bible, not just the pastor. In the Churches I have attended, the congregation meets and decides on the tenents of that particular church (such as varying attitutes toward divorce and remarriage), not one Pope. In the Churches I have attended, people are asked to submit (pray) before and to God, not before Mary, St. Sebastian, St. Andrew, St. Peter and so on.

If people read and knew their Bible (and by knew I mean even going back to the original languages to understand what exactly is being said, no translation of The Bible is perfect) then I could appreciate their views more. Instead, Catholics are more like "The Church says this so it is so, even if it isn't in the Bible."

Basically, I see the Catholic insitution as a hypocritical one, and the catholic congregation as an uneducated (scriptually) one.

br0kenrabbit

[

Christian teachings include both the OT and the NT. The NT freed us from the law of the OT, but the law isn't every command, the law is the law of Moses: the 10 commandments. That doesn't mean we shouldn't follow the 10 commands, we should, but we aren't going to hell because we fail to live up to them because Christ lived up to them for us. But they're still something you should adhere to as a Christian.

br0kenrabbit

Catholics DO read their bible.:|

LJS9502_basic

I didn't say they don't read it, I said they don't know it. Ask a Catholic what the word 'Aion' means and they'll give you a blank stare. Well, Aion was just translated like 24 different ways in the text, and usually not correctly. So the only Bible they know is the one the Church follows, and they haven't done the historical research to truely understand what is being said.

Just because you read the Bible doesn't mean you know it.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

Right, that was during the pre-Christian times. Passover became uncessary after Christs death because our promised land in no longer on this Earth since Christ was rejected as King of the Earth.

br0kenrabbit

You're missing a noun and a verb.

no. i wouldnt say yes.

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[

Christian teachings include both the OT and the NT. The NT freed us from the law of the OT, but the law isn't every command, the law is the law of Moses: the 10 commandments. That doesn't mean we shouldn't follow the 10 commands, we should, but we aren't going to hell because we fail to live up to them because Christ lived up to them for us. But they're still something you should adhere to as a Christian.

LJS9502_basic

Why do you keep repeating what I just said like I didn't even say it? Didn't I just say:

The NT freed us from the law

Yes, I think I did. So, what's your point? Pointless post.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Catholics DO read their bible.:|

br0kenrabbit

I didn't say they don't read it, I said they don't know it. Ask a Catholic what the word 'Aion' means and they'll give you a blank stare. Well, Aion was just translated like 24 different ways in the text, and usually not correctly. So the only Bible they know is the one the Church follows, and they haven't done the historical research to truely understand what is being said.

Just because you read the Bible doesn't mean you know it.

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

Christian teachings include both the OT and the NT. The NT freed us from the law of the OT, but the law isn't every command, the law is the law of Moses: the 10 commandments. That doesn't mean we shouldn't follow the 10 commands, we should, but we aren't going to hell because we fail to live up to them because Christ lived up to them for us. But they're still something you should adhere to as a Christian.

br0kenrabbit

Why do you keep repeating what I just said like I didn't even say it? Didn't I just say:

The NT freed us from the law

Yes, I think I did. So, what's your point? Pointless post.

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]And what exactly?

LJS9502_basic

You're missing a noun and a verb.

Okay. The Jews were promised the land of Cainin (Israel). The Passover is to mark the time they passed into the 'promised land' and the end of Moses time. The passover for the Jews was not only to celebrate coming into the promised land, but to look forward to the messiah who would rule that promised land for them in the name of God.

Jesus was that Messiah but he was rejected by the Jews. Therefore, upon Christs death (which is why, as a Jew, he participated in passover during life, because the Messaih had to follow all the rules and rites for the sinners he was 'taking the place of')...upon his death the promised land is no longer Israel, but rather The Kingdom That Will Be at the Second Coming.

We look forward to that with the Lords Supper, which transplants The passover.

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

Christian teachings include both the OT and the NT. The NT freed us from the law of the OT, but the law isn't every command, the law is the law of Moses: the 10 commandments. That doesn't mean we shouldn't follow the 10 commands, we should, but we aren't going to hell because we fail to live up to them because Christ lived up to them for us. But they're still something you should adhere to as a Christian.

LJS9502_basic

Why do you keep repeating what I just said like I didn't even say it? Didn't I just say:

The NT freed us from the law

Yes, I think I did. So, what's your point? Pointless post.

No, they do not contradict. You're just not understanding the differences between 'freed' and 'adherence'.

Freed from the law doesn't mean you shouldn't obey the law, it simply means that it's not going to be used to condemn you to hellfire. One should still try to walk with the law, as the Bible clearly says that you should do nothing that a man can hold against you.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

You're missing a noun and a verb.

br0kenrabbit

Okay. The Jews were promised the land of Cainin (Israel). The Passover is to mark the time they passed into the 'promised land' and the end of Moses time. The passover for the Jews was not only to celebrate coming into the promised land, but to look forward to the messiah who would rule that promised land for them in the name of God.

Jesus was that Messiah but he was rejected by the Jews. Therefore, upon Christs death (which is why, as a Jew, he participated in passover during life, because the Messaih had to follow all the rules and rites for the sinners he was 'taking the place of')...upon his death the promised land is no longer Israel, but rather The Kingdom That Will Be at the Second Coming.

We look forward to that with the Lords Supper, which transplants The passover.

Anyway, in regard to Peter...Matthew 16 13-20 "You are 'Rock,' and on this rock I will build My Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."LJS9502_basic

Here is some additional commentary on that.

"Mat 16:18

Thou art Peter - This was the same as if he had said, I acknowledge thee for one of my disciples - for this name was given him by our Lord when he first called him to the apostleship. See Joh 1:42.

Peter, πετρος, signifies a stone, or fragment of a rock; and our Lord, whose constant custom it was to rise to heavenly things through the medium of earthly, takes occasion from the name, the metaphorical meaning of which was strength and stability, to point out the solidity of the confession, and the stability of that cause which should be founded on The Christ, the Son of the Living God. See the notes at Luk 9:62.

Upon this very rock, επι ταυτη τη πετρα - this true confession of thine - that I am The Messiah, that am come to reveal and communicate The Living God, that the dead, lost world may be saved - upon this very rock, myself, thus confessed (alluding probably to Psa 118:22, The Stone which the builders rejected is become the Head-Stone of the Corner: and to Isa 28:16, Behold I lay a Stone in Zion for a Foundation) - will I build my Church, μου την εκκλησιαν, my assembly, or congregation, i.e. of persons who are made partakers of this precious faith. That Peter is not designed in our Lord's words is evident when one studies the original meanings of the words. Peter was only one of the builders in this sacred edifice, Eph 2:20 who himself tells us, (with the rest of the believers), was built on this living foundation stone: 1Pe 2:4, 1Pe 2:5, therefore Jesus Christ did not say, on thee, Peter, will I build my Church, but changes immediately the expression, and says, upon that very rock, επι ταυτη τη πετρα, to show that he neither addressed Peter, nor any other of the apostles. So, the supremacy of Peter, and the infallibility of the Church of Rome, must be sought in some other scripture, for they certainly are not to be found in this."

Source: Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

Why do you keep repeating what I just said like I didn't even say it? Didn't I just say:

The NT freed us from the law

Yes, I think I did. So, what's your point? Pointless post.

br0kenrabbit

No, they do not contradict. You're just not understanding the differences between 'freed' and 'adherence'.

Freed from the law doesn't mean you shouldn't obey the law, it simply means that it's not going to be used to condemn you to hellfire. One should still try to walk with the law, as the Bible clearly says that you should do nothing that a man can hold against you.

Here is some additional commentary on that.

blackregiment

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Catholics DO read their bible.:|

LJS9502_basic

I didn't say they don't read it, I said they don't know it. Ask a Catholic what the word 'Aion' means and they'll give you a blank stare. Well, Aion was just translated like 24 different ways in the text, and usually not correctly. So the only Bible they know is the one the Church follows, and they haven't done the historical research to truely understand what is being said.

Just because you read the Bible doesn't mean you know it.

If more read their Bible, they would understand the difference between 'Biblical' and 'Cathecism'. I've had many, many Catholics tell me that the assumption of Mary is in the Bible...it most certainly is not.

This is what I'm getting at.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

I didn't say they don't read it, I said they don't know it. Ask a Catholic what the word 'Aion' means and they'll give you a blank stare. Well, Aion was just translated like 24 different ways in the text, and usually not correctly. So the only Bible they know is the one the Church follows, and they haven't done the historical research to truely understand what is being said.

Just because you read the Bible doesn't mean you know it.

br0kenrabbit

If more read their Bible, they would understand the difference between 'Biblical' and 'Cathecism'. I've had many, many Catholics tell me that the assumption of Mary is in the Bible...it most certainly is not.

This is what I'm getting at.

Yeah....contradiction dude. If you don't have to adhere to then there is no obey nor disobey. Nonetheless, Jesus did follow many of the rules of the Jewish leaders himself. So I don't see how you can say they should be important to Christians....

LJS9502_basic

I didn't say a thing about the traditions of the Jewish leaders, as they were corrupt themselves (remember the moneychangers in the temple scene?) I said he obeyed Jewish Law, which is Biblical, not something the Jewish leaders put in place.

If one is a true Christian, the holy spirit has an indewlling within and one would be guided to obey the law. However, failable as we are, Christ forgave us even if we don't follow the law.

But if you go around purposely breaking the laws then it's obvious there's no indwelling of the holy spirit within you. So yes, Christians attempt to abide by the old laws even though we won't be condemned for going against them...its just if you're routinely breaking the laws you most likely are not Christian.

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]None of which disproves what that days mean to Christians. Your point then is....what?

LJS9502_basic

Because: Jeremiah 10:2-4: "Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen,"

Christians AREN'T SUPPOSE TO PARTICIPATE in celebrations as such. Again, here's the full verse, it's saying DON'T DO THAT!

Jeremiah 10:2-4: "Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not."

The entire Bible is God's revelation to man with Christ as the focal point and central person. Both the Old and New Testaments are central to Christianity. The Old Testament is Christ concealed and the New Testament is Christ revealed.

In the Old Testament

The books of Law reveal the foundation for Christ the Messiah

The historical books reveal the preparation for Christ the Messiah

The poetic books aspire to Christ the Messiah

The books of prophecy reveal the expectation of Christ the Messiah

In the New Testament

The Gospels reveal the historical manifestation of Christ the Messiah

The Acts reveal the propagation of Christ the messiah

The Epistles reveal the interpretation of Christ the Messiah

Revelation reveals the consummation of all things in Christ the Messiah

Ah anecdotal evidence to generalize. For the record...most Catholics do know that.LJS9502_basic

You'd be suprised. Most Catholics I've met are more about the ritual of things than actually reading and comprehending. You know, the "I go to church" people.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Ah anecdotal evidence to generalize. For the record...most Catholics do know that.br0kenrabbit

You'd be suprised. Most Catholics I've met are more about the ritual of things than actually reading and comprehending. You know, the "I go to church" people.

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Yes they do. About as much as other groups. Just because you disagree with their interpretation......does not mean they don't know their bible. Love the stereotype though......:roll:LJS9502_basic

If more read their Bible, they would understand the difference between 'Biblical' and 'Cathecism'. I've had many, many Catholics tell me that the assumption of Mary is in the Bible...it most certainly is not.

This is what I'm getting at.

Here is a timeline showing when various Catholic traditions were introduced into the Catholic Church.

Year Tradition

431 Proclamation that infant baptism regenerates the soul.

500 The Mass instituted as re-sacrifice of Jesus for the remission of sin

593 Declaration that sin need to be purged, established by Pope Gregory I

600 Prayers directed to Mary, dead saints, and angels.

786 Worship of cross, images, and relics authorized.

995 Canonization of dead people as saints initiated by Pope John XV.

1000 Attendance at Mass made mandatory under the penalty of mortal sin.

1079 Celibacy of priesthood, decreed by Pope Gregory VII.

1090 Rosary, repetitious praying with beads, invented by Peter the Hermit.

1184 The Inquisitions, instituted by the Council of Verona.

1190 The sale of Indulgences established to reduce time in Purgatory.

1215 Transubstantiation, proclaimed by Pope Innocent III.

1215 Confession of sin to priests, instituted by Pope Innocent III.

1229 Bible placed on Index of Forbidden Books in Toulouse.

1438 Purgatory elevated from doctrine to dogma by Council of Florence.

1545 Tradition claimed equal in authority with the Bible by the Council of Trent.

1546 Apocryphal Books declared canon by Council of Trent.

1854 Immaculate Conception of Mary, proclaimed by Pope Pius IX.

1870 Infallibility of the Pope, proclaimed by Vatican Council.

1922 Virgin Mary proclaimed co-redeemer with Jesus by Pope Benedict XV.

1950 Assumption of Virgin Mary into heaven, proclaimed by Pope Pius XII.

http://pro-gospel.org/x2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=34&Itemid=1

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Ah anecdotal evidence to generalize. For the record...most Catholics do know that.LJS9502_basic

You'd be suprised. Most Catholics I've met are more about the ritual of things than actually reading and comprehending. You know, the "I go to church" people.

Put it this way: If Catholics did their research as I have done, like going back to the old languages and understanding what's actually being said, they'd abondon the Catholic church because of it's heresey. The fact that they are still Catholics tells me they haven't read anything other than the Latin/English Bible and have not looked in the Bible beyond Sunday Morning (which is not the Sabbath, as the Sabbath is the 7th day and Sunday is the 1st).