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

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

[Dean Baker]

Baptist church 'fake pope' sign attracting attention, criticism By JEANNINE F. HUNTER, hunter@knews.com April 13, 2005

NEWPORT, Tenn. - Two days after being posted, a church marquee message that questions the purpose of the papacy is still attracting attention in this small community.

"What I am trying to do is to let people know there's only one way to heaven through Jesus Christ," said the Rev. Cline Franklin, pastor of Hilltop Baptist Church. "There's no need for help. God sent his son, Jesus Christ. We're all priests if we're saved. I don't need to go to anybody else to pray."

The sign's side facing Broadway, the main thoroughfare in Newport, reads, "No truth, No hope Following a hell-bound pope!" On the other side, facing the church parking lot, it reads: "False hope in a fake pope."

The message appeared days after Pope John Paul II's funeral last week.

"It is unfortunate when it comes from within the Christian church. It's really sad," said the Rev. Dan Whitman, 54, pastor of Newport's Good Shepherd Catholic parish and Holy Trinity parish in Jefferson City. "You learn how to deal with it and pray not to be that way yourself."

It does not reflect mainstream Baptist thought, said Dr. Merrill "Mel" Hawkins, associate professor of religion and director of the Center for Baptist Studies at Carson-Newman College in Jefferson City.

"When you see signs like that, they are almost like relics or artifacts of a bygone era," Hawkins said.

He spoke about animus between Protestants and Catholics persisting after the Protestant Reformation and for centuries, during which "harsh things were said, couched within misperceptions, misunderstandings."

Among the major misperceptions is that Catholics "venerate the pope on the same level as Jesus," Hawkins said, and that "the pope is connected to their salvation in place of Jesus Christ."

Catholics make up about 12 percent of the population in the South.

"Catholics are a minority faith in the South, and there's often bias toward minority religious communities because people don't understand," he said.

James Gaddis, a lay speaker who also chairs the board at First United Methodist Church, said he had not seen the sign but had heard about it.

"I understand that it's very degrading," he said. "I think it's tragic that any church group would stoop to this posture."

Following Tuesday night's council meeting, Newport Mayor Roland Dykes Jr. said he was a little saddened by the message.

"It doesn't behoove any of us to determine who is going to heaven or hell. I think the pope is a highly, highly respected person," he said.

Franklin's church is a five-year-old independent Baptist church. When asked what the message meant, he said: "What does 'pope' mean? It means father. We have a heavenly father, and the Bible says we shall call no man a father. "

He said people have been driving by or taking pictures or calling to share their views. He said the intent was not to offend Catholics and people are misunderstanding the sign.

Copyright 2005, Knoxville News-Sentinel Co.

[Half Vast Conspiracy]

I know MANY Catholics who are basing their salvation on their works alone...

Interesting. I'm Catholic and I don't know any Catholics who are basing their salvation on their works alone

[adiaireton8]

I fail to see your point. The salvation of the thief on the cross does not mitigate Christ's explicit claim in John 3 that "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he can not enter into the Kingdom of God."

It was physically impossible for the thief to be baptized with water in the condition in which he came to faith. But we should not use this case as some kind of nullification of Christ's claim that baptism is necessary for salvation. (This is why the Fathers taught that baptism through blood and baptism through desire were possible when baptism with water was not possible.)

-A8

[adiaireton8]

All the Fathers disagree with you. That should give you pause. St. Paul explicitly teaches that through the sin of Adam, all men were made sinners, and death came to all men. Since death is the result of sin, if infants were without original sin, there would be no infant death.

-A8

[tort_feasor]

This is the profession of faith we Catholics make. I don't see alot of arguable points.

The Nicene Creed
We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

[adiaireton8]

Dan, I've been reading this thread between you and Thorin, and I can only ask you to consider carefully what Thorin is saying. Twenty years ago, I was in your shoes. Then I did a lot of studying, and realized that I was deeply mistaken. Go read the Church Fathers. Study Church history. You will see that what you are defending is not the Bible, but rather a very contemporary philosophy applied to Christianity. It is called individualism. You make the Bible into your sole authority, and you are the ultimate interpreter of the Bible for yourself. You think you can interpret the Bible for yourself. You don't recognize apostolic succession, and the authority of the Church. Christ told us that as people mistreated Him and maligned Him, so they would mistreat and malign the Apostles and their successors. You are fulfilling Christ's statement, in what you have said on this thread. Just pause a second, and think about how serious that is, if you are wrong. When Ananias and Saphira lied to Peter (and to the Holy Spirit), they were struck dead. And yet you have the nerve to say of Peter's successor the things you have said. Even Michael the archangel did not make a judgment against the devil, as Jude tells us. Yet you have no reluctance to put Peter's successor in hell. Some caution, and reverance, is in order, just in case you could possibly be wrong. You, like so many posting on this thread, have many misconceptions of Catholicism. Not only do you not understand it, you don't understand the support for it. Nor do you recognize the philosophy which underlies your rejection of Catholicism. You have a lot of studying to do. Be prudent, and do your studying first, before saying foolish things that you might later regret. You may end up being a Catholic someday, as strange as that may sound to you now.

-A8

[tort_feasor]

The trick question of catholic doctrine is who is the only person born without original sin? Adam was created by God, Eve Shaped out of his rib and therefore only Mary was born without original sin, to be the mother of the Son of God. Jesus was born with original sign and baptized.

[pro610]

Born again is a spiritual transformation. Let me put to you in simplicity.
If there is a man dying in the desert and he repents his sins to Christ he will be forgiven ,WATER OR NOT!
Why are you using a quote from Plato in your tagline?

[Teplukin]

Really? Do tell. Name one position held by Pope John Paul II, for example, that is incompatible with American conservativism.

The pope was against the War in Iraq. The Pope expressed reservations about capitalism. Beyond that, I knew that Cardinal O'Connor of New York favored unions & workers rights. I can't imagine he would have been so vocal if it displeased the Pope

[DannyTN]

There's a lot wrong with Islam. But the main thing is that it's rejected Jesus as the Son of God and in so doing they have rejected God's plan of salvation.

No form of governance is going to rescue that religion. Were it more democratic and more reasonable it would just simply be that much more insidious. At least now there's a much clearer line between Christianity and Islam.

[tort_feasor]

For your information on prayers to saints, Mary and God.

The special veneration due to the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church states: 66 “The various forms of piety towards the Mother of God, which the Church has approved within the limits of sound and orthodox doctrine, according to the dispositions and understanding of the faithful, ensure that while the mother is honored, the Son through whom all things have their being Col 1:15-16 and in whom it has pleased the Father that all fullness should dwell Col 1:19 is rightly known, loved and glorified and his commandments are observed.”

There are three levels of reverence that we in this life offer. Latria is reserved for God alone. Hyperdulia is reserved for the Blessed Virgin. Dulia is reserved for all the rest of the heavenly host.

http://www.secondexodus.com/html/catholicdefinitions/hyperdulia.htm

[rollo tomasi]

If Mary is the Mother of God then I guess Mary's mom would be the Grandmother of God and so forth. Technicalities are mind-boggling. Also, this Co-redeemer stuff is so asinine that anybody who took part in Jesus's mission could be called the same. Is Judas a co-redeemer? He played a very important part in Christ's journey. Please note I am not equating Mary with Judas Iscariot, just the logic of this dogma.

“This point of doctrine [the immaculate conception] is not expressly dealt with anywhere in the Bible, nor was it preached by the Apostles, and for many centuries it was not mentioned at all by the Church. Gradually, however, as the idea of the future dogma began to develop among the faithful, theologians submitted the point to the closest examination, and finally, the view then generally prevailing was formally pronounced as a dogma of the Church by His Holiness Pope Pius IX in 1854”. A Handbook of the Catholic Faith, A. Van De Lisdonk

Before any long winded response make sure the dogma lines up with scripture. The Bible never preached sola ecclesia.

[BriarBey]

You make me ashamed to be a Protestant.
****
There are no more protestants. Protestants PROTESTED the Roman Catholic system, you are now one of them.

[BriarBey]

Although I have had some past run ins with Briar Bey, I dont believe that she is a bigot. Those are harsh words
****

Why Thank you Edmund Joaquin, that was very sweet of you.

[safisoft]

You have a warped view of Catholic Doctrine and "Grace". That is either by design or purposeful ignorance. Either of those precludes a meaningful conversation. I will not waste my time with a ravening wolf

Again, please refrain from attack. If I have a "warped view", educate me. So far, you have posted twice to me, and have provided no basis for your position except to accuse me. Exactly what is "GRACE"?

I am amazed by how this thread began. A significant number of non-catholics distanced themselves from the Baptist preacher - then a lot of Catholics immediately began to try to point out how similar their beliefs were to Protestants. When questioned about that, many, you included get all defensive.

[Tao Yin]

Now you are just being silly.

The statement "God is not limited by our intellect" means that we can not explain all of the mysteries of God. For example. I do not understand the mysteries of Communion.

1 Corinthians 11:27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.

During communion, I eat bread and I eat the body of the Lord. How can it be both? His body is in, under, and with the bread. How can this be?

I guess if I was Pope, I could come up with a crazy explanation and then curse anyone who doesn't believe. But this is an example of God not being limited by our intellect. I don't understand it and that's OK. Jesus said this is My Body. Who am I to question? It is both.

[safisoft]

On Pentecost, Peter commanded them all to be baptized, including their children. Whole households were baptized (Acts 16:33; 1 Cor. 1:16). Baptism is the Christian equivalent of circumcision, and circumcision was done, as you may know, on the eighth day. From the time of Abraham, it has been known that entering into the covenant did not depend upon being old enough to believe for oneself. The same is true of the New Covenant.

If "baptism" is equivalent to circumcision, it would come as a shock to those who practiced both - ancient Jews. Many "Christians" incorrectly think that "baptism" is a "New Testament" thing. It is not. The mikvah has been a part of Judaism since ancient times. No one was shocked at John when he told them to repent and be immersed. The Temple in Jerusalem had huge mikvot (immersion pools) at the entrance. Everyone entering during festival time (yes, Shavuot [Pentecost] is a commanded festival. Immersion was a part of religious life. The average "Christian" may be shocked to know that it is still a part of Judaism. A ancient ruling said that if a village could not afford a synagogue and a mikveh (an immersion pool), they should build a mikveh first.

So, no - immersion was not a "Christian" invention - and it is not the same or an equivalent to circumcision. Immersion, in the Hebrew Scriptures signified a CHANGE IN STATUS (especially repentance), circumcision signified a CHANGE IN IDENTITY. Not the same then, not the same now.

[BriarBey]

Just WHY did Martin Luther tack those 95 things to the doors anyway??
******
roflol!!! Elsie this one totally cracked me up....95 THINGS? LOL Bless your heart, that was cute. (I am not being sarcastic, I was just completely tickled with your wording.)

[Dean Baker]

Mary was born without original sin? I had never heard that??

[tort_feasor]

This wasa the first google link (EWTN- Catholic TV)
MARY WAS CONCEIVED WITHOUT ORIGINAL SIN
Pope John Paul II

---

The Church’s reflection has made explicit the profound meaning of the words ‘full of grace’ spoken by the angel Gabriel to the Virgin of Nazareth
The perfection of holiness that Mary enjoys from the first moment of her conception was the subject of the Holy Father's catechesis at the General Audience of Wednesday, 15 May. The Pope went on to say that the recognition of this perfect holiness "required a long process of doctrinal reflection, which finally led to the solemn proclamation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception". Here is a translation of his talk, which was the 20th in the series on the Blessed Virgin and was given in Italian.

1. Mary, "full of grace", has been recognized by the Church as "all holy and free from every stain of sin", "enriched from the first instant of her conception with the splendour of an entirely unique holiness" (Lumen gentium, n. 56).

This recognition required a long process of doctrinal reflection, which finally led to the solemn proclamation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.

The title "made full of grace", addressed by the angel to Mary at the Annunciation, refers to the exceptional divine favour shown to the young woman of Nazareth in view of the motherhood which was announced, but it indicates more directly the effect of divine grace in Mary; Mary was inwardly and permanently imbued with grace and thus sanctified. The title kecharitoméne has a very rich meaning and the Holy Spirit has never ceased deepening the Church's understanding of it.

Sanctifying grace made Mary a new creation

2. In the preceding catechesis I pointed out that in the angel's greeting the expression "full of grace" serves almost as a name: it is Mary's name in the eyes of God. In Semitic usage, a name expresses the reality of the persons and things to which it refers. As a result, the title "full of grace" shows the deepest dimension of the young woman of Nazareth's personality: fashioned by grace and the object of divine favour to the point that she can be defined by this special predilection.

The Council recalls that the Church Fathers alluded to this truth when they called Mary the "all-holy one", affirming at the same time that she was "fashioned as it were by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature" (Lumen gentium, n. 56).

Grace, understood in the sense of "sanctifying grace" which produces personal holiness, brought about the new creation in Mary, making her fully conformed to God's plan.

3. Doctrinal reflection could thus attribute to Mary a perfection of holiness that, in order to be complete, had necessarily to include the beginning of her life.

Bishop Theoteknos of Livias in Palestine, who lived between 550 and 650, seems to have moved in the direction of this original purity. In presenting Mary as "holy and all-fair", "pure and stainless", he referred to her birth in these words: "She is born like the cherubim, she who is of a pure, immaculate clay" (Panegyric for the feast of the Assumption, 5-6).

This last expression, recalling the creation of the first man, fashioned of a clay not stained by sin, attributes the same characteristics to Mary's birth: the Virgin's origin was also "pure and immaculate", that is, without any sin. The comparison with the cherubim also emphasizes the outstanding holiness that characterized Mary's life from the very beginning of her existence.

Theoteknos' assertion marks a significant stage in the theological reflection on the mystery of the Lord's Mother. The Greek and Eastern Fathers had acknowledged a purification brought about by grace in Mary, either before the Incarnation (St Gregory Nazianzen, Oratio 38, 16) or at the very moment of the Incarnation (St Ephrem, Severian of Gabala, James of Sarug). Theoteknos of Livias seems to have required of Mary an absolute purity from the beginning of her life. Indeed, she who was destined to become the Saviour's Mother had to have had a perfectly holy, completely stainless origin.

4. In the eighth century, Andrew of Crete is the first theologian to see a new creation in Mary's birth. This is how he reasons: "Today humanity, in all the radiance of her immaculate nobility, receives its ancient beauty. The shame of sin had darkened the splendour and attraction of human nature; but when the Mother of the Fair One par excellence is born, this nature regains in her person its ancient privileges and is fashioned according to a perfect model truly worthy of God.... The reform of our nature begins today and the aged world, subjected to a wholly divine transformation, receives the first fruits of the second creation" (Serm. I on the Birth of Mary).

Then, taking up again the image of the primordial clay, he states: "The Virgin's body is ground which God has tilled, the first fruits of Adam's soil divinized by Christ, the image truly like the former beauty, the clay kneaded by the divine Artist" (Serm. I on the Dormition of Mary).

Mary's original holiness is beginning of Redemption

Mary's pure and immaculate conception is thus seen as the beginning of the new creation. It is a question of a personal privilege granted to the woman chosen to be Christ's Mother, who ushers in the time of abundant grace willed by God for all humanity.

This doctrine, taken up again in the eighth century by St Germanus of Constantinople and St John Damascene, sheds light on the value of Mary's original holiness, presented as the beginning of the world's Redemption.

In this way the Church's tradition assimilates and makes explicit the authentic meaning of the title "full of grace" given by the angel to the Blessed Virgin. Mary is full of sanctifying grace and is so from the first moment of her existence. This grace, according to the Letter to the Ephesians (1:6), is bestowed in Christ on all believers. Mary's original holiness represents the unsurpassable model of the gift and the distribution of Christ's grace in the world.

---

Taken from:
L'Osservatore Romano
Weekly Edition in English
22 May 1996, page 11

http://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2bvm20.htm

[BriarBey]

Mary was born without original sin? I had never heard that??
****

Dean, go to the library or an old book store and find yourself a catholic encyclopedia. Look up immaculate conception. When you find what that means, then find the scripture where it says the anti-christ will claim that Jesus did not come in the flesh. 2+2=4........Mary with no fleshly nature....plus the Holy Spirit who had no fleshly nature...creates a savior who had no fleshly nature. The RCC is claiming Jesus did not come in the flesh, altho they do not come right out and say it.

Not only did Christ come with our inherited sinful nature, He conquered it, then paid for ours. If Christ was not capable of being tempted, Satan would not have tried. You find no reference in scripture to Satan tempting the Father.

Course this opens a whole new can of worms since one of the doctrines of devils being taught is that Jesus is God. Just a little step closer to getting people to accept that Mary was the mother of God.

You catholics need to settle down, you will rule the world again, and all the RCC's daughters will return to her, they already pretty much have. "Here is a mystery, the anti-christ ONCE WAS, IS NOT, AND IS AGAIN." Your IS AGAIN, is pretty much upon us.

You'll get your chance to feed us nuts to the Lions again, or crucify us, or burn us at the stake. Quit getting so fired up about it all.