Testimony of a Former Irish Priest

BereanBeacon.Org ^ | Richard Peter Bennett

[metmom]

But deliberately removing my name and pinging another to the post falls under the same category as what you complained about in post 1,735.

Seems like you’re not adverse to slicing the bologna pretty thin yourself but that it’s a matter of who’s doing the slicing....

[metmom]

Exodus 20:[1] And the Lord spoke all these words: [2] I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. [3] Thou shalt not have strange gods before me. [4] Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. [5] Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them: I am the Lord thy God, mighty, jealous, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me:

[Mad Dawg]

STATIONS OF THE WHITE HANKY:

(What's the white hanky reference? I don't get it.)

[Mad Dawg]

If you take one verse literally, you got to take them all that way.

So does it follow that you take none of the words of the Bible literally?

[MarkBsnr]

"...The term Protestant was coined by the Protestants, as well."

History according to MarkBsnr? I can't find it. Can you? Proof please.

Hmm. Good point. I am unable to find anything more conclusive than your source.

Charles V could do nothing because the princes stood up in unity for religious freedom. From then on, they were known as the Protestors or the Protestants.

The implication seems to be a mutual agreement but I was unable to find who first hung the tag on this group.

Also, your claim that "Romanist and RC" were intended to be perjoratives is also without merit.

Really? A short journey through Google may change your mind. The first page brings such exciting entries as these:

Essays [third series] on the errors of Romanism, having their ... - Google Books Result Richard Whately - 1837 - Oxford movement - 384 pages ... by touching briefly on some of the particular points in which faults, essentially the same with those of the Romanists, have beset, and will ever beset, ... books.google.com/books?id=EWkrAAAAYAAJ...

[PDF] Typology, Diachrony, and Universals of Semantic Change in Word ... File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View by F Rainer - 2003 - Cited by 6 - Related articles A Romanist's Look at the Polysemy of Agent Nouns. Franz Rainer ..... The origin and history of the instrumental extension of Romance deverbal agent ... mmm.lingue.unibo.it/mmm-proc/.../021-034-Rainer-MMM4.pdf - SimilarRead the ebook The history of Romanism : from the earliest ... THe principal origin-si authorities for the history of the council of Trent .... That the Puseyite unites with the Romanist is occupying this popish ground, ... www.ebooksread.com/...romanism.../page-56-the-history-of-romanism--from-the-earliest-corruptions-of-christianity-to-the-p-ala.shtml - CachedEIPS -

The Origin of False Doctrines Jan 22, 1998 ... Too few of us here in Northern Ireland see Romanism in its true light, ... dogmas accepted by the Roman Catholic Church are of pagan origin. ... www.ianpaisley.org/rome.asp?rome_origin_doctrines.htm - Cached - Similar

Essays (third series) on the errors of Romanism, having their ... Mar 17, 2010 ... Ebook and Texts Archive > Canadian Libraries > Essays (third series) on the errors of Romanism, having their origin in human nature ... www.archive.org/details/a613881200whatuoft - Cached

Is Mary "Queen of Heaven" and "Mother of God"? The origin of this idolatry had its root in ancient mythology. ... It is claimed by Romanists that the mother and child sustain the same relation in heaven ... www.abcog.org/mary4.htm - Cached - Similar

Cyclopaedia of Biblical, theological, and ecclesiastical literature - Google Books Result 1891 - Religion ... the monastic institute, to be of apostolical origin ? ... It is one of the charges brought hy Romanists against Protestantism that it has violently ... books.google.com/books?id=b6Dzw6ULQqMC...

JIMMY AKIN.ORG: The Origin Of Lent Apr 9, 2007 ... Romanism is not the faith once delivered to the saints. ... thread on the origins of Lent comes the sound of the flatulence you emmitted. ... www.jimmyakin.org/2007/04/the_origin_of_l.html - Cached - Similar

Chapter 2: The Perpetuity of the Church. Presbyterians are so-called because of their form of government and owe their origin and practices to John Calvin. Calvin, like Luther, was a Romanist, ... www.pbministries.org/.../Origin%20and%20Perpetuity/origin_02.htm - Cached - Similar

Now let us go to:

Wikipedia: Romanism

Top Home > Library > Miscellaneous > Wikipedia This article does not cite any references or sources.

Romanism was a word used as a derogatory term for Roman Catholicism in the past when anti-Catholicism was more common in the United States and the United Kingdom. The term was frequently used in late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century Republican invectives against the Democrats, as part of the slogan "Rum, rebellion, and Romanism" (referencing the Democratic party's constituency of Southerners and anti-Temperance, frequently Catholic, working-class immigrants). The term and slogan gained particular prominence in the 1928 presidential campaign, in which the Democratic candidate was the outspokenly anti-Prohibition Catholic Governor of New York Al Smith. The term is still used, though rarely, by anti-Catholics.

Ahem, rarely that is, excepting on FR, it seems.

Frankly, your use of the term "Protestant" is frequently meant as a pejorative while, to others, it is merely descriptive.

Do you have examples where I used Protestant as perjorative?

[MarkBsnr]

IF you are Orthodox, the Catholics claim you are a wayward Catholic...

Which Catholics?

[MarkBsnr]

There are some who play the "generalized" game to the hilt and cry to the Moderator when their feathers are ruffled.

True, but some of us try to keep some sort of restraint on those in our group who do this sort of thing.

[Iscool]

I wonder how many Catholics had died even having eaten Communion?

According to Jesus, that would be impossible...If HE was speaking literally...

[wmfights]

What beliefs are absolutely OFF the table for discussion as they will never change.

It's not enough to recognize the Trinitarian God, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. You must believe The Gospel of Grace to be a Christian. If a church adds a "but", "maybe", or "and" it ceases to be The Gospel and they are preaching a different gospel.

For the sake of clarity I'm referring to Faith Alone in the death, burial and Resurrection of Jesus Christ (ICor.15:1-4).

I would like you to read this post and think about these questions and get back to me with what you believe about "sowing discord among brethren" and 'unity among believers'. I will do the same and I BET our results will match within one or two words.

Great question, I'm interested in your thoughts.

I believe "sowing discord among brethren" would be trying to cause believers of The Gospel of Grace to believe it's insufficient. On these forums it's pretty easy to spot.

"unity of believers" is by the indwelling Holy Spirit that makes us members of the Body of Christ. It's also pretty easy to spot on these forums. For example, I can argue at great length with our Reformed Brothers and Sisters about a wide variety of things, but we both hold to The Gospel and are standing on the side of the Cross that is empty because "it is finished". We are not constantly working to be saved, or to keep our salvation.

Are RC's our brethren?

They preach a different Gospel. They seem to be stuck in the Judaic model that existed prior to the Resurrection and they vehemently reject the sufficiency of The Gospel of Grace that Jesus Christ revealed to Paul when He converted him. So I guess the long answer is RC's are not our brethren now, I pray that changes.

[wmfights]

Though, of course, these aren't brethern except in very loose terms.

You don't have to stay on the wrong side of the Cross. You can join us any time. We will rejoice with you in throwing off empty rituals and the yoke of men. All you have to do is have Faith Alone in Jesus Christ Alone.

[Iscool]

Oh boy. If you think that Paul is preaching a different message of a different Christ then this is yet another departure from Christianity, one that has been put down as heresy many many times.

Nope...Different Gospel...Same Jesus...

It's really simple...Why you don't get it is a mystery to me...

Jesus came to earth to save His own...The Jews...He came bringing a Kingdom, with Himself as the Messiah...

The Jew rejected their Messiah...

To then make the Jews jealous, and to punish them, Jesus offered salvation to Gentiles...Freely...He gave it to us freely...That required a change in the Jewish plan...

Jesus chose Paul to preach THAT Gospel to the Gentiles and anyone including Jews who would listen...

At the time of God's chosing, the Gentile 'church', the Body of Christ, will be taken out and the Jews again will be the recipient of God's offer...

This time, they will accept the offer...

Of course you will reject this because your religion told you that you guys are now the Jews...Pity on you...

[Iscool]

Can’t deny that...

[wmfights]

Though, of course, if one’s sub-sect of a sub-sect sees itself as having no common Gospel with The Church, then it falls into the same category as Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc. — outside Christ’s Church and not Christian.

I'm sorry you think membership in your church is the key to salvation. There is nothing in Scripture proclaiming Roman Catholicism the way to salvation.

My Bible says:

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

John 6:29 Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent."

Rom. 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead you will be saved.

You can join us on this side of the Cross any time. Just believe The Gospel.

[Iscool]

Sure. But there is no book called "The Revelation of Paul". There is a book called the Revelation of Peter, which was ruled non Canonical, for instance, as well as other non canonical books of revelations of others. But Paul does not write such a book. Have you ever wondered why?

That's your problem...You're trying to out think God...

Paul's epistles are Holy Scripture...Peter knew that...Why don't you???

[Iscool]

Depending on the pastor. I cannot even guess at the number of my Protestant friends who have engaged in church shopping - and the greatest factor is the current standing or beliefs or actions of the current pastor.

And this is a bad thing??? The Pastor is the Preacher...I want to be some place where the Pastor preaches the word of God...Not all do...

But look at you...You go any where in the world and hear the same preaching (and I use that term lightly) regardless of where you are at...You're stuck...

[wmfights]

You have far more commonality with the Apostolic Church than with those posters.

It's the RCC that stands on the wrong side of the Cross. All these churches you keep referencing don't add to The Gospel.

[small voice in the wilderness]

Thank you, Iscool. I can't seem to be able to get through...

..And what would be the ultimate reason God would choose to do this?

"That in the AGES TO COME he might shew the EXCEEDING RICHES OF HIS GRACE in HIS KINDNESS toward US THROUGH CHRIST JESUS." (Eph. 2:7).

There is a group of people who believe that 'by Grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is a gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast" Who believe that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose again the third day, Who believe that the Finished Work of Jesus Christ has saved us, and have accepted His finished work for our salvation, who make up a body called the Church the body of Christ. This Body of believers had a definite beginning, a definite Gospel of the Grace of God, a definite commission, and a definite catching away when the Body of Christ is complete, The fullness of the Gentiles is brought in.

[wmfights]

Beautiful!

What a great summary.

[small voice in the wilderness]

"Our brethren" would infer that we are joined by something greater than the minor issues that arise from one church to another. Knowing that the "..One body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith, One baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.."(Eph. 4:4-6), is what UNITES the believers.

If this is not believed, then what else is there to unite us inThe Church the Body of Christ?

The gospel? The name of Jesus?

"For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him." (2 Cor. 11:4)..."For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves in to the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be acording to their works." (2 Cor. 11:13-15)

A gospel that teaches works as part of salvation is another gospel in this age, and their works of righteousness will be their END, not their saving.

I agree with you, too, on just what "sowing discord among brethren" means. Giving the Gospel of the grace of God, and explaing the dispensation of the Grace of God, is NOT sowing discord, although there are LOTS of people who think it is. To not say the truth, is to let a lie continue, unchallenged by God's Word.

My continuing prayer is that the eyes of those who WANT to see are opened. But I do not believe we are just to pray. We are told to put on the whole armour of God and to STAND. In Spirit and Truth. And that we do, every day.

Thank you so much for your input. I knew we would be in agreement on this. It's just good to see! BTW, you know when you're reading along in Scripture and suddenly a verse, or just a word is just THERE, staring you in the face? That just happened to me with ".ministers of righteousness, whose end shall be according to their works.

As opposed to "NOT by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his MERCY he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by HIS GRACE, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life." (Titus 3:5-7).

[Mad Dawg]

So neither of you thinks Jesus ever spoke literally?