Posted on 11/14/2017 2:24:54 PM PST by nickcarraway
Robert Jeffress spent Wednesday with Donald Trump, supporting the president during his fundraising visit to the Belo Mansion in downtown Dallas. On Thursday, the First Baptist Dallas pastor and Trump's biggest evangelical supporter had to do something a lot less fun — take to the Fox News airwaves to defend himself from charges that he is anti-Catholic.
Word of Jeffress' potentially anti-Catholic views bubbled to the surface this week when a reporter asked White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders about her boss's continued praise for the Dallas demagogue, given Jeffress' controversial statements about the Catholic church. Sanders said that she wasn't "aware of Robert Jeffress being anti-Catholic" and that she knew that he worked with Texas Catholics on events like the anti-abortion rights demonstration March for Life.
On Fox News, Jeffress repeated Sanders' line, confirming that he works with Catholics against abortion, and said that the characterization of his thoughts about Catholicism was inaccurate.
"What they did was they went back and recycled old quotes from years ago that were either completely manufactured at the time or ripped out of context," Jeffress said.
The Observer believes that Jeffress deserves a fair hearing about whether he was taken out of context, so we've taken the liberty of transcribing, in their entirety, Jeffress' comments about Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church from a 2010 segment on his radio show Pathway to Victory.
"This is the Babylonian mystery religion that spread like a cult throughout the entire world. The high priests of that fake religion, that false religion, the high priests of that religion would wear crowns that resemble the heads of fish, that was in order to worship the fish god Dagon, and on those crowns were written the words, ‘Keeper of the Bridge,’ the bridge between Satan and man.
"That phrase, Keeper of the Bridge — the Roman equivalent of it is Pontifex Maximus. It was a title that was first carried by the Caesars and then the emperors and finally by the Bishop of the Rome, Pontifex Maximus, the Keeper of the Bridge.
"You can see where we’re going with this. It is that Babylonian mystery religion that infected the early church. One of the churches it infected was the church of Pergamos, which is one of the recipients of the Book of Revelation. And the early church was corrupted by this Babylonian mystery religion, and today the Roman Catholic Church is the result of that corruption.
"Much of what you see in the Catholic Church today doesn’t come from God’s word; it comes from that cultlike, pagan religion. Now you say, ‘Pastor, how can you say such a thing? That is such an indictment of the Catholic Church. After all, the Catholic Church talks about God and the Bible and Jesus and the blood of Christ and salvation.’
"Isn’t that the genius of Satan? If you want to counterfeit a dollar bill, you don’t do it with purple paper and red ink. You’re not going to fool anybody with that. But if you want to counterfeit money, what you do is make it look closely related to the real thing as possible.
"And that’s what Satan does with counterfeit religion. He uses, he steals, he appropriates all of the symbols of true biblical Christianity, and he changes it just enough in order to cause people to miss eternal life."
Basically, Jeffress believes that Catholicism is a counterfeit of genuine Christianity, descended from a Babylonian fish-worshiping cult. Its resemblance to the real article shows Satan's genius, Jeffress says. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the faith practiced by 70 million Americans.
Post #77
This is what happens when religion gets conflated with ethno-culture. Ethno-culture is subjective . . . religion isn't.
You don't believe your religion is true? You think they're all true?
Your reference does not say that God hates anyone.
God’s justice does not amount to hate.
No, I would not admit Charles Manson into my home.
Love or hate is one thing. Stupidity is another.
So, many of you think that the ongoing assault against Christianity is going to be solved by beating each other over the head with Bibles?
Honestly, I have been insulted and hurt as a Catholic in my life by some Protestants but I never let it change my respect and affection for them (at least the ones who were living a good Christian life). I have attended many Protestant services with friends and have attended Eastern Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Coptic, and Ethiopian Masses. It was a joy to participate in all of them because the spirit of Christ is evident in all of them.
Rather than emphasizing the differences in doctrine and customs, why not reach out to each other and work together to defeat the evils in front of us? The Devil is winning at this point, with marriage and family under attack, millions of babies murdered, and Christians around the world being martyred every day.
For those Catholics who feel it's necessary to attack others - you aren't helping anyone, certainly not God. If we wish to convince others, give good example and invite - don't insult or disparage. Our Lord wants us together with Him, doesn't want us to lose anyone.
I recommend prayer everyone, prayer for the salvation of the world, prayer for the defeat of the Devil, prayer for the love that Jesus told us was essential as neighbors.
Salvation is strictly by grace through faith.
Works only enter the equation AFTER one is saved and one can still be saved without doing good works.
The Catholic church's position that you describe still requires works for salvation, meaning you are trusting something besides the finished work of Christ on the cross.
Tell me, if someone does not have the *right* works, is he still saved?
And just what works are required and who decides what they are and if they are enough?
Luke 18:9-14 He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’
But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”
This shows clearly the great error of Romanism, to which you apparently subscribe. Here is the correct formulation:
God's free gift of salvation does not require works of any kind but that of Christ alone, performed on the Cross. The Father confers both salvation and justification at the instant the sinner places his/her entire continual irreversible trust in Jesus alone, with nothing more added, ever.
To think otherwise is an insult to the perfection and graciousness of His Finished Suffering on the Cross for our crimes against God, which as depraved humans we are not and can never be fit to pay.
At the point of total commitment to Jesus as Master, the human being ceases to be the sole possession of the Devil Satan, becomes the permanent never-changing possession of The Son, forever, having obtained the gift of everlasting life as a newly-born spiritual being, with the destination that one's soul and spirit will instantly exist in God's Heaven when it parts from the physical non-functioning material body.
At that same moment when salvation and freedom from sin-guilt is conferred through faith, the newly-born person is enrolled as a servant of The Christ; that is, made a saint, accountable for his/her thoughts and actions, as well as given the responsibility of managing as much of the Father's earthly estate as has been apportioned to him.
This process is called "sanctification," and is progressive in nature. The person's ultimate destination is not affected whatsoever by his/her work product, but his/her final rewards are dependent on the amount and quality of the works performed in this life.
Part of this sanctification involves progressively growing in spiritual maturity through discipleship, starting as a newborn babe (βρέφος, 1 Pet. 2:2); into infancy (νήπιος, Heb. 5:13) totally faithful but as yet unskilled in the scriptural truths; advancing into trainability as a spiritual child with accountability in learning to overcome both one's own lusts as well as devilish influences (παιδια, 1 Jn. 2:13, Jas. 1:14); from thence into status as a true warrior for Christ in early spiritual adulthood (νεανίσκος, 1 Jn. 2:13,14) no longer vulnerable to Satanic devices; and finally in this world, reaching the spiritual age of spiritual wisdom and discernment, having the mind of Christ (πατήρ, 1 Jn 2:13,14; τέλειος = of full age, discerning, having the mind of Christ, Heb. 5:14, 1 Cor. 2:14-16, Phil. 2:5-8) yet not having reached the state of infallibility (Philippians 3:12).
The eternal finality, of course, is perfected sanctity, not possible until death of the earthly body and its corruptibility (Jas. 1:3-4).
Once more, as long as the Romish opinion is that works are required for salvation, as you have cited at the outset, your religion is false, and the doors of your church house, no matter how beautified, lead one to Hell and eternal death. You deny that the necessity of good works to obtain eternal life is not "working one's way to Heaven," but that is exactly what the proposed Romish transaction is. And this concept is totally unscriptural and unchristian.
Luther had it right, but he merely recovered and reinstated the Gospel principle well-known and advertised by the Apostles that irreversible, total faith alone in Jesus The Christ of the Bible alone, is sufficient and totally adequate, and is all that is required or desired by the Father to admit one to His Heaven, guilt-free.
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth* on me hath everlasting life" (John 6:47 AV).
Plus nothing.
======
Note: * = present tense, active voice, participle mode; means ". . . is persistently and without ceasing continually believing . . ."
========
It’s a spiritual work of mercy to inform the ignorant after all.
That's true, but you cannot claim to be learned or helpful when your doctrine is so twisted that it points in the wrong direction. The Apostles Simon Peter and and Paul have warned you:
"Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace,
without spot, and blameless.
And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as
our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things
hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned* and unstable wrest,
as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction" (2 Peter 3:14-16 AV; with my emphasis marking).
======
Note:
* = ἀμαθής = undiscipled
It seems clear that your doctrine does not come from having been discipled by a Bible-believing teacher.
Thank you for your reply. In the Matthew 5 passage, Jesus is instructing/commanding His followers as to how they must live during their time on earth. This must not be conflated with judgement. Judgement is what comes after our mortal lives end. In the first case, it is our inescapable duty to obey the commands of Christ. In the second case, only Jesus will judge. That will be His province, not ours.
As for love/agape, we are in no doubt. Jesus modeled it for us. This is why the second greatest commandment changed. Before the Incarnation, that command was to love others as we love ourselves. After Jesus’ sojourn among us, the commandment became: love others as Christ loved us.
How did Jesus love us? He spent three years meeting people’s spiritual and physical needs. Then He submitted Himself to a terrible death so as to secure us entry into heaven. Iow, He saw our desperate need and met it.
Jesus took His agape/love towards us very seriously. The cross is the eternal testament as to how seriously.
Jesus demands that we take agape/love towards others equally seriously. We know this from the second half of Matthew 25. Jesus paints for us a very vivid picture of judgement. Like a shepherd separating the sheep from the goats, He divides the eternally saved from the eternally lost.
On what basis does the division take place? Precisely on the basis of the first and second greatest commandments. First, if you love Jesus you will keep His commandments. Second, His command to love others as He loved us.
The eternally saved saw needs and met them. They provided food, drink, clothes, visitation and care to those in need. As a result, Jesus welcomed them into their eternal reward.
The lost did not practice toward others the kind of agape/love Jesus modeled during His incarnation. They had opportunities to meet needs and failed to do so. As a result, Jesus sent them into eternal damnation.
As for Manson, I would show him agape as I would show any other. I.e.: I’d endeavor to meet his greatest need. That need is not to be invited into anyone’s home. Manson’s need is to reconcile with God. If he were receptive when I detailed the Gospel message [through the safety glass at the max prison where he resides] he would be saved. If not, his blood wouldn’t be on me.
(One thing you will notice about agape in
the NT. It is not one size fits all. Whenever Jesus met an individual—be it Nicodemus, the rich young ruler, Zacheus, the woman at the well, etc—He met them where they were. He addressed their most urgent/immediate need. We must do likewise. For some the need is food. For others, it is the Gospel. The indwelling Holy Spirit will guide us to make the right decisions.)
From these posts, it looks like God sends people he loves to Hell. That’s news to me.
Would he be cast from Heaven for killing people?
So; we have a choice.
Believe what Jesus is reported to have said in Scripture; or believe the above.
25 When they found him on the other side of the lake, they asked him, “Rabbi, when did you get here?”
26 Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw the signs I performed but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. 27 Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.”
28 Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”
29 Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”
30 So they asked him, “What sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? 31 Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written: ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’[c]”
32 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”
34 “Sir,” they said, “always give us this bread.”
35 Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. 37 All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40 For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
Billions of people know John 3:16.
Very few can rattle off John 3:18!
I think somebody said “OOF!” on that one. Time to love a condemned criminal, eh?
Not if he repented to God, was willing to be owned by Jesus, and completely trusted in Jesus to save him from his sins and sinfulness.
No joke.
God forgets when the heart is washed clean and the sins are washed away by Jesus' blood!
Like He did for me . . .
"God has blotted them out, I'm happy and glad and free!
God has blotted them out, you can turn to Isaiah and see:
Chapter forty-four, twenty-two and -three.
God has blotted them out, and now I can SHOUT,
For that means ME!"
Parents punish children they love for precisely that reason.
If you think that God sending people who reject Him to hell means that He doesn’t love them, then you might as well claim that parents who discipline their children don’t love them.
So are you saying that love means giving others good things and that if you don’t give someone something good, you don’t love them?
Dear MM, your argument here defies logic. The hell-bound people are children of the Devil, not God’s children. God is all-wise, omniscient, with foresight. That they wind up in the Lake of Fire is not a surprise to the All-Mighty. It is only a surprise to the one sentenced to it.
It doesn’t mean He doesn’t love them.
Your contention is that God would not send people He loved to hell.
Loving them does not play into His decision on whether to send people to hell or not.
At that point, you might as well buy into the rest of the If God loves us, then why do bad things happen? Or if bad things happen, it’s proof that God doesn’t love us.
What nonsense.
People go to hell because they are sinners and God is just and they refuse to accept his offer of salvation. NOT because he hates them.
Still waiting for the Scripture that states that God hates sinners.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.