Baptist church 'fake pope' sign attracting attention, criticism (Pope Bound for Hell).

Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. ^ | April 13, 2005 | JEANNINE F. HUNTER

[rollo tomasi]

My personable belief is Mary could have been assumed by Christ but historical evidence is lacking. Christ Resurrection was dogma from day one yet it takes 1900 years of questioning Mary's Assumption for it to become a damnable offense to not believe.

I put my faith in Christ's rising from the dead, not Mary being called Queen of Heaven. Does she sit on the left hand side of God while Jesus is on the right? If being Queen she must be close to being equal to God. Just some pondering questions, I will accept it either way, God will do what He wants. It is just not implied directly by Scriptures only tradition starting 400 years after the Resurrection of Christ.

[BriarBey]

Who made you the authoritative interpreter of the book of Revelation?

MY FATHER!! You hearken to the voice of men.

*****
But you don't have that authority.

WHY don't I? Does not the Holy Spirit indwell His people or was the upper room in the book of Acts a sham and heresy also!

God said "He is no respecter of persons"....."In Christ Jesus there is NO Male or Female." "ALL MANS righteousness is as filthy rags."

HOW CAN THE SAME BLOOD of Christ that bought our salvation make one person any holier than another.......Is there a blood the hiarchy in your counterfeit church gets that is better than the blood that was shed for me?

As with Israel...you are not happy with your God given freedom or your ability to walk with your Heavenly Father as Adam walked with Him. The veil was torn.....there is no division between God and His people thru priests or pastors. You scream for a King....God has given you one, called a Pope, because you have found God insufficient, and He does not meet your expectations of who you believe the God of Abraham to be. Serve your NEW God and you will go into perdition with him. For he counterfeits the ONE TRUE GOD!!
Lucifer pulls to himself the worship he has wanted since he rebeled and was cast to the earth from the heavens and you love him and will give it to him ,as will the world.

[rollo tomasi]

"Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem at the Council of Chalcedon made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcharia, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles and that her tomb, when opened upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to Heaven." --Homily on the Dormition

This came straight out of 'de Transitu'. This revelation by Juvenal was news to the Emperor at the time, meaning it seemed it was not common knowledge that the Assumption took place.

The news of Christ's Resurrection spread like wild fire but it too over 400 yrs. for the Assumption to be announced. Sounds suspicious to say the least and that is why Pope Gelasius and later, Pope Hormisdas tried to put a halt on this dogma. Simple lack of evidence otherwise it would have become dogma right away.

[rollo tomasi]

"This came straight out of 'de Transitu'." Meaning the story of the Assumption came out of 'de Transitu' since no other formally documented writings of the Church Fathers existed.

[adiaireton8]

but it just seems like too much rationalization.

The same could be said for Einstein's equations, or anything that is hard to understand. Such a claim says something about ourselves, and nothing about the veracity of the claim in question.

Why is Jesus related to David through Joseph also?

Jesus is not biologically related to David through Joseph. This is why Matthew connects Jesus to David through Mary in Matthew 1:16, and why Luke adds "and so it was thought", in his genealogy, at Luke 3:23.

I do not believe that Mary and Jesus had to share flesh.

You are free to believe whatever you want, but you don't understand that only one who came from Adam could save Adam's race. This goes all the way back to Genesis 3. The seed of the woman crushes the serpents head. Just stating that you don't believe it doesn't prove anything; it ignores what the Church (and even *most* Protestants) has always taught, and the reasons why it was taught.

If you want to add special qualities to Mary, don't expect me at the communion table. I believe in closed communion within my synod.

I didn't "add" any qualities to Mary. I am simply stating truths about Mary that the Church has taught. Is your "synod" the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church, or do you refuse to affirm the Nicene Creed?

2 Corinthians 12:2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven--whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows.

About Mystical Mary... "I do not know, God knows."

Just because Paul did not know whether he was embodied or disembodied in his mystical experience, does not show anything about what we can know about Mary regarding her conception or assumption. Such a move is an absolute non sequitur.

If you want to reunite Christianity, get everyone to agree on a creed, not have everyone agree about dogma.

Do you want to reunite Christianity? Protestants left the Church. If you want to reunite the Church, then return to fellowship with the duly ordained successors of Peter and the Apostles. If you don't like the dogmas of the Church, then you are free not to join the Church. But don't expect the Church to water down the truth so as to accomodate your theological comfort level.

Acts 10:34
Then Peter began to speak: "I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism

But those who reject Christ are not saved, and God punishes evildoers. So "favoritism" here does not mean the truth of religious "pluralism" or moral relativism. It is not the case that all paths are equal ways to God.

I can not accept secret or developmental doctrine.

If you cannot accept it, then it must not be true. But seriously, you already believe it. The Bible never mentions the word "synod". Nor are Apostolic or Nicene Creeds in the Bible. Nor is the canon of the Bible listed in the Bible.

Neither can I accepts a single standard for all christianity that exceeds Scriptures (and the creeds).

Again, if you cannot accept it, then apparently it must not be true. Why is this about *you*? We are supposed to be talking about whether it is true or not. You make the issue into what you can or cannot accept. It does not matter what you can or cannot accept; what matters is what is true. Perhaps you don't realize that your statement is almost contradictory. You don't want a single standard that exceeds Scriptures, and yet you want the creeds. What gives the creeds their authority? The Church! Who determines what books belong to the Bible? The Church. Your own beliefs already require an authority for all Christianity which is not merely the Scripture or the creeds. In that way, your statement is contradictory. Your statement rejects any other authority, and at the same time your statement requires another authority. In that way, your statement is self-contradictory.

-A8

[BriarBey]

I put my faith in Christ's rising from the dead, not Mary being called Queen of Heaven.
****
But alas....Rev. 17..does show you a system that declares herself to be Queen. Not only that GOD specifically says His people are sitting in her or He wouldn't be making the call for His people to "Come OUT of her" because He is going to destroy her and all that are in her.

"COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE!!!" or YOU will see DESTRUCTION..NOT BLESSINGS...DESTRUCTION!!!!

He seemed to think we should come to realize WHAT we should be coming out of.

[GatorGirl]

Yeah, I'd like to ask this guy if he refers to the man who impregnated his mother as his "father" or not.

What an ignoramus!

[adiaireton8]

The issue here comes down to the authority of the Church. When the Church teaches definitively that Mary was assumed, then we must believe it, just as we must believe the creeds. Deism is false. Christ guides His Church.

If being Queen she must be close to being equal to God.

That's definitely a non-sequitur. Mary is a created human being. Christ is the Second Person of the Trinity, consubstantial with the Father. Mary is exalted through being the Mother of Christ. Forever and ever she will always be the Mother of Christ. Being the Mother of Christ puts her in a very unique and exalted position. But she is 100% human, not divine. She is not God incarnate; Christ is God incarnate. Just learn what the Church teaches, before criticizing a straw man.

-A8

[rollo tomasi]

I know what the Church teaches, 'Mary Queen of Heaven'. The Church is making an issue which resembles a co-equalship with God at the same time saying it's not. I find no Scripture describing this linguistic exercise.

[GatorGirl]

I'm sure it's comforting to believe that if you "accept Jesus Christ as your personal Savior" and go right on sinning and living a selfish and uncharitable life, you will still go to Heaven; but we Catholics believe that we should worship Christ, indeed have a personal relationship with Him, confess our sins and strive to avoid sin (while realizing we are human and therefore sinful) and do good works.

If you think it's "works alone" you are seriously misguided.

[BriarBey]

If you don't like the dogmas of the Church, then you are free not to join the Church.
*****
Lets see how long that freedom to not join lasts since according to her dogmas

HERETIC: One who, having been baptized and professing Christianity, pertinaciously rejects or doubts ANY article of faith determined by the authority of the Catholic Church.


I am to the RCC what I am to Islam....a heretic....BOTH are well known historically for their abilitiy to slaughter any heretics, who will not bend their knee to their religion.

Having said that........I would say Satan is the Father of both and they will find common ground against the true Church..The Bride of Christ given time.

After all the world must be cleansed of free thinking people, who won't get with the program or the control.

[adiaireton8]

Now we are getting to the core of the problem. You think that everyone has equal authority in the Church. But Christ gave authority to the Apostles, and especially to Peter, to whom He gave the keys (Matt 16:19). He did not give the keys to every believer, but only to Peter. By this authority, Peter and the Apostles ordained bishops in the various cities to which they travelled. And as Clement (the third bishop of Rome) tells us, they commanded that those whom they ordained should ordain others to replace those bishops and priests who died. And thus, there would be an organic succession of authority, from bishop to succeeding bishop, until Christ's return. No one in the Church denied this until the Reformation. For 1500 years, this was the received view in the Church. But in these last days, the true authority is being spurned, and everybody makes himself into an authority, as you yourself do. You reject the Lord's anointed, and usurp for yourself the seat of Peter. Lucifer himself, as you mentioned, did exactly that. He rejected his rightful place, and sought to usurp the authority over him, which was Christ. Those who reject Christ's Apostles reject Christ. One cannot accept Christ and reject His Apostles. You claim to submit to the Apostles, but you do not submit to those whom they appointed to govern the Church until Christ's return. You can't have it both ways. If you reject Christ's appointed authorities, you are rejecting the very Apostlehood which they embody. You are making yourself equal in authority to an Apostle, making your obedience to the writings of the Apostles in the New Testament mere lip service. If you are equal in authority to the Apostles, then why submit to the Apostles' writings? Just write your own Bible. If the Apostles can write books of the Bible, and you have equal authority with the Apostles, then write your own Bible, and stop pretending to submit to the authority of the Apostles.

-A8

[adiaireton8]

I find no Scripture describing this linguistic exercise.

Why do you think there must be Scripture to describe every theological truth? Do you believe in "Sola Scriptura"? If so, read Sungenis's book, mentioned above, for a thorough refutation.

-A8

[adiaireton8]

Speculation is cheap. Good argumentation, however, is much harder. You provide lots of rhetoric, and claims that the Church is fathered by Satan, but you provide not a single shred of evidence for your slander of Christ's one, holy, apostolic catholic Church. The fact that certain individuals in the Church have made major mistakes in the course of history, is no indication that the Church is fathered by Satan. It merely indicates that the Church is full of fallible people. Peter himself, the rock upon whom the Church is built, much as Abraham is the father of the Jews, made mistakes, as all Catholics know.

-A8

[conservonator]

BriarBey,

You need help, and prayers. Someone has poisoned your mind and it is destroying your soul.

I'll be praying for you.

[Last Visible Dog]

"Bible" is not a biblical term and is not found in the Bible. The Bible therefore does not come from the Bible and does not exist.

The name of the book is of little relevance. The point is Catholics made up rituals and rights that have no basis is scripture. The word "Bible" was created over a thousand years after the crucification of Christ so your point is rather silly.

I can't tell you what is the "correct" Christian religion but I can tell you most of Catholic rituals, rights, and icons are not based on scripture.

[Last Visible Dog]

I and all my classmates studied the Bible in Catholic grammar and high school at some point. Hence, your point is refuted.

You failed to address my point therefore your claims of refutation are highly exaggerated. My point is most Catholic rituals , rights, and icons do not come from scripture.

[BriarBey]

Again you twist scripture!!!

1 Corinthians 3:16-23

Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you? If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him; for God's temple is sacred, and you are that temple.

Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a "fool" so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness", and again, " The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile." So then, no MORE boasting about MEN!!

ALL THINGS (did you get that? ALL THINGS) are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future---ALL ARE YOURS, and you are of Christ and Christ is of God.

1 Corinthians 4:6-8

Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may LEARN from us the meaning of the saying,"DO NOT go beyond what is written."
Then you will not take pride in one man over against another. FOR WHO MAKES YOU DIFFERENT FROM ANYONE ELSE?
WHAT DO YOU HAVE THAT YOU DID NOT RECEIVE? AND IF YOU DID RECEIVE IT, WHY DO YOU BOAST AS THOUGH YOU DID NOT?
Already you have all you want!! Already you have become rich! You have become KINGS--and that WITHOUT US!!


Seems our church fathers as you call them...I call them brothers in Christ (mainly due to the fact, the RCC has turned them into something else to pray to also)....were more intent on making those they taught closer to God and of more authority than they themselves. NOT SO in today's religious world!! Man is building his own kingdoms and Satan himself couldn't tempt the Son of God to take them. I'm with Jesus...I think I will follow his lead and voice...as instructed, I don't want them either.

[OKIEDOC]

You paint with a broad brush.

There's always been hypocrites among Catholics, Evangelical Christians and Jews believers of the one true God.

I always looked at the bright side of things. Once you declare to be for God then you automatically create Satan as your enemy. Satan temps you with sin of all kinds as a test of your new faith.

As R.Lee Ermey says "there ain't no atheists in a fox hole".

[Last Visible Dog]

I and all my classmates studied the Bible in Catholic grammar and high school at some point. Hence, your point is refuted.

Vatican Archives Reveal Bible Was Once Banned Book

By Jude Webber

ROME, Jan 22, 1998 (Reuters) - The Vatican permitted scrutiny of one of the most notorious periods in Roman Catholic Church history on Thursday when it opened the archives of the department once known as the Inquisition. Scholars now will be able to study cases such as that of the astronomer Galileo, condemned by the Inquisition for claiming the earth revolved round the sun, and Giordano Bruno, a monk burnt for heresy in 1600 in Rome's Campo dei Fiori square.

Vatican officials say the secret files, dating between 1542 and 1902, will yield precious few juicy secrets -- the Church officially rehabilitated Galileo in 1992, for example. But the archives do contain some surprises. Opened on Thursday alongside the Inquisition archives was the infamous Index of Forbidden Books, which Roman Catholics were forbidden to read or possess on pain of excommunication. They showed that even the Bible was once on the blacklist. Translations of the holy book ended up on the bonfires along with other "heretical'' works because the Church, whose official language was Latin, was suspicious of allowing the faithful access to sacred texts without ecclesiastical guidance.

Protestants, who split from Roman Catholics during the Reformation in the 16th and 17th centuries, were allowed to read holy works directly. The Index of Forbidden Books and all excommunications relating to it were officially abolished in 1966. The Inquisition itself was established by Pope Gregory IX in 1233 as a special court to help curb the influence of heresy. It escalated as Church officials began to count on civil authorities to fine, imprison and even torture heretics. It reached its height in the 16th century to counter the Reformation. The department later became the Holy Office and its successor now is called the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which controls the orthodoxy of Catholic teaching. Its head, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, declared the archives open at a special conference and recalled how the move stemmed from a letter written to Pope John Paul some 18 years ago by Carlo Ginzburg, a Jewish-born, atheist professor in Los Angeles.

Source