PING to an excellent post by daniel1212.
I ping you to think deeply about what you've been fed.
Actually as your premise is false so is your conclusion, for instead, it is Catholicism which has corrupted the original "code" of the original "programmer," and under the guise of His authority has introduced additional code of a virus which seeks to hijack the instructions, resulting in a operating system with distinctives not found written in the original system . And it wasn't the Russians but the Romans.
Thanks be to God, the latter were unable to actually write the programming for the Original OS, which if they did would be quite different (Mary and the in most every epistle, and normatively celibate priests offering the Eucharist as a sacrifice for sins and spiritual food as their unique active function, praying to saints, baptizing infants, teach souls go to Purgatory in order to become good enough to be with God, with leadership possessing ensured veracity, versus subject to testing by Scripture as supreme, etc.)
Nonetheless in order to misuse its authority she preserved the Original Code, thus a few she calls sheep have found the Original Programmer, yet she effectively made their own uninspired words superior in authority to the Original Coding, as did other groups known for their competing revelation and particular elitism, though they also invoke the authority of the Original, which they abuse.
Some noble souls have been working on a restoration according to the Original Programing, with such success that many have come to know the Original Programmer, personally realizing a new Operating System as a result, though the the old OS yet resides in the same unit, though marked for permanent deletion, with person yet having a choice on which OS he want to boot from, with the New OS dealing with problems resulting from the old code as he chooses the New OS, which motivates him to do so.
Yet beyond the mere human instrumentality for bad code there exists a malicious hacker who seeks total dominance (though for now typically seeks to remain anonymous but is exposed by the Original Programing), and who is ultimately behind the viruses (and adware) of Catholicism and the like, and who much hinders the work of restoration by lovers of Truth, which must still deal with the remnants of bad code, searching the Original Source for corruption, and be willing to deal with it.
What this has to do with the Bereans is quite irrelevant. My own examination of scripture has lead me personally to agree with the Gospel as presented to me by the One, True, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church founded by Christ Jesus, the tenants of which I have found to be reliable and trustworthy.
I do not know what kind of Bible you are reading, but it must have a lot more NT material written to the NT church.
Which church, as manifested in Scripture ( (Acts through Revelation, which shows how the NT church believed the gospels),
1. Was not based upon the premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility of office (papal or conciliar in union with the pope) as per Rome, which has presumed to infallibly declare that she is and will perpetually be infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) criteria, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares.
And thus a faithful RC is not to seek to ascertain the veracity of RC teaching by examination of evidences. For to do so would be to doubt the claims of Rome to be the assuredly infallible magisterium, by which a RC obtains assurance of Truth.)
For since Catholicism's claim of ensured magisterial veracity is the basis for a faithful Catholics assurance of doctrine, we see statements such as:
"Catholic doctrine, as authoritatively proposed by the Church, should be held as the supreme law; for, seeing that the same God is the author both of the Sacred Books and of the doctrine committed to the Church, it is clearly impossible that any teaching can by legitimate means be extracted from the former, which shall in any respect be at variance with the latter.." [as the premise is false, so is the conclusion] — Providentissimus Deus
"It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock...the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors ." - Vehementer Nos, an Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906.
To the shepherds alone was given all power to teach, to judge, to direct; on the faithful was imposed the duty of following their teaching, of submitting with docility to their judgment , and of allowing themselves to be governed, corrected, and guided by them in the way of salvation. — Epistola Tua (1885), Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII
“Still, fundamentalists ask, where is the proof from Scripture? Strictly, there is none. It was the Catholic Church that was commissioned by Christ to teach all nations and to teach them infallibly. The mere fact that the Church teaches the doctrine of the Assumption as definitely true is a guarantee that it is true.” — Karl Keating, Catholicism and Fundamentalism (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1988), p. 275)
It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine....I may say in strict truth that the Church has no antiquity. It rests upon its own supernatural and perpetual consciousness. Its past is present with it, for both are one to a mind which is immutable. Primitive and modern are predicates, not of truth, but of ourselves....The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour. — "Most Rev.erend" Dr. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Lord Archbishop of Westminster, “The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost: Or Reason and Revelation,”
2. Never presumed that being the historical instruments and stewards of Scripture, and recipients of promises of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation meant that such possessed ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility, as Catholicism presumes, with Catholics arguing that promises of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation mean that their church possesses ensured infallibility.
Instead of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility of office, while the Old Testament magisterial office certainly had authority, with dissent being a capital offense, (Dt. 17:8-13) yet the church began with an itinerant Preacher and preachers who were rejected by those who sat in the seat of Moses (Mt. 23:2 cf. Ex. 19:5; Lv. 10:11; Dt. 4:31; 17:8-13; Ps, 11:4,9; Is. 41:10, Ps. 89:33,34; Jer. 7:23) over Israel, who were the historical instruments and stewards of Scripture, "because that unto them were committed the oracles of God," (Rm. 3:2) to whom pertaineth" the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" (Rm. 9:4) of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation as they believed, (Gn. 12:2,3; 17:4,7,8;
But the NT church began with dissenters (Christ, and apostles and prophets) who established their Truth claims upon Scriptural substantiation in word and in power. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.) For the church began (Christ, and apostles and prophets) in Scriptural dissent from the Scribes and Pharisees who sat in the seat of Moses
3. Did not believe that whatever the historical magisterium formally declared was the word of God, as in oral tradition, was necessarily the case and equal to Scripture, but which Catholicism presumes.
Instead, while the formal word of God/the Lord was sometimes first spoken, yet it is manifest that writing is God's means of preservation. (Exodus 17:14 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19; Isaiah 30:8; cf. Job 19:23; Matthew 4:4; John 20:31; Luke 24:44-45; Acts 17:11; Revelation 1:19; 20:12,15) And that, as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God, as is abundantly evidenced. And which noble souls ascertained the veracity of oral preaching by. (Acts 17:11)
Also, note that Sola Scriptura preachers can enjoin obedience to oral preaching, presuming it is Scriptural, while apostolic preaching could be wholly inspired of God and include new revelation, which even Rome does not claim when speaking the words of her presumed "infallible" promulgations.
4. Never promised or taught ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility was essential for preservation of truth, including writings to be discerned and established as Scripture, and for assurance of faith, and that historical descent as the stewards of Scripture means that such possessed ensured infallibility.
Instead, the church began with common people having correctly discerned both men and writings as being of God (essentially due to their unique and enduring heavenly qualities and attestation), and again, even in dissent from those who sat in the sat of Moses. (Jn. 7:45-49)
5. Never recorded or manifested (not by conjecture) sprinkling or baptism without repentant personal faith, that being the stated requirement for baptism. (Acts 2:38; 8:36-38)
6. Never preached a gospel of salvation which begins with becoming good enough inside to be with God (due to removal of "original sin" and by "infused" charity) effected by the act of sprinkling (RC "baptism") even morally incognizant souls (infants), and which thus usually ends with becoming good enough again to enter Heaven via suffering in purgatory, commencing at death.
Instead, while nothing unclean shall enter God's Holy City, (Rv. 21:27) believers are already washed, sanctified and justified (1Co. 6:11) by effectual faith in the risen Lord Jesus to save them by His sinless shed blood, (Rem. 3;25 — 5:1; Eph. 2:8,9; Titus 3:5) and are already accepted in the Beloved on His account, and made to spiritually sit with Christ in Heaven, (Eph. 1:6; 2:6) and by Him have direct access to God in the holy of holies in prayer. (Heb. 10:19) And who, if they die in faith will go to be with the Lord at death. (Phil 1:23; 2Cor. 5:8 [“we”]; Heb, 12:22,23; 1Cor. 15:51ff'; 1Thess. 4:17)
And with the only suffering after this life being that of the loss of rewards (and the Lord's revelation and disapproval) at the judgment seat of Christ, which one is saved despite the loss of, and which does not occur until the Lord's return and believers resurrection. (1Cor. 3:8ff; 4:5; 2Tim. 4:1,8; Rev.11:18; Mt. 25:31-46; 1Pt. 1:7; 5:4) And which resurrection being the only transformative the believer looks forward to after this life (Rm. 8:23; 2Co. 5:1-4; Phil 3:20,21; 1Jn. 3:2) — not purgatory, which suffering commences at death in order to enable souls to enter Heaven.
7. Never had a separate class of believers called “saints,” who directly go to Heaven at death, while the rest go to purgatory.
8. Never taught that Peter was the "rock" of Mt. 16:18 upon which the church is built, interpreting Mt. 16:18, rather than upon the rock of the faith confessed by Peter, thus Christ Himself.
For in contrast to Peter, that the LORD Jesus is the Rock (“petra”) or "stone" (“lithos,” and which denotes a large rock in Mk. 16:4) upon which the church is built is one of the most abundantly confirmed doctrines in the Bible (petra: Rm. 9:33; 1Cor. 10:4; 1Pet. 2:8; cf. Lk. 6:48; 1Cor. 3:11; lithos: Mat. 21:42; Mk.12:10-11; Lk. 20:17-18; Act. 4:11; Rm. 9:33; Eph. 2:20; cf. Dt. 32:4, Is. 28:16) including by Peter himself. (1Pt. 2:4-8) Rome's current catechism attempts to have Peter himself as the rock as well, but also affirms: “On the rock of this faith confessed by St Peter, Christ build his Church,” (pt. 1, sec. 2, cp. 2, para. 424) which understanding some of the so-called “church fathers” concur with.)
9. Never taught or exampled that all the churches were to look to Peter as the bishop of Rome and the first of a line of supreme infallible heads reigning over all the churches, and having the last word in questions affecting the whole Church. Besides what Scripture reveals, see history section here.
10. Never manifestly saw apostolic successors being voted for after Matthias was chosen for Judas (even though James was martyred: Acts 12:1,2), which was in order to maintain the foundational number of apostles (cf. Rv. 21:14) and which was by the non-political Scriptural means of casting lots. (cf. Prov. 16:33)
Furthermore, Rome's so-called apostolic successors fail of the qualifications and credentials of manifest Biblical apostles. (Acts 1:21,22; 1Cor. 9:1; Gal. 1:11,12; 2Cor. 6:4-10; 12:12)
11. Never had any pastors distinctively titled "priests" as they did not engage in any unique sacrificial function, that of turning bread into the "real" flesh and blood of Christ and dispensing it to the people, or even dispensing bread as their primary ordained function, versus preaching the word, (2Tim. 4:2) which alone is said to spiritually nourish souls, (1Tim. 4:6; cf. Mt. 4:4) and which builds them up. (Acts 20:32)
12. Never was a church that manifested the Lord's supper as being the central means of grace around which all else revolved, “the source and summit of the Christian faith,” in which “the work of our redemption is accomplished,” as being a sacrifice for sins through the intercession of a special class of sacerdotal "priests," (see above) offering the "real" but unbloody flesh and blood of Christ (under the appearance of bread and wine, until these begin to decay, but which are said to no longer exist after the words consecration), which is to be physically consumed in order to obtain spiritual and eternal life (as per RC literalism, of Jn. 6:53,54). See here by God's grace.
In contrast, Scripture teaches one receives spiritual life by believing the gospel by which one is regenerated, (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-9; Eph. 1:13) and thus one desires the milk of the word, (1Pt. 2:2) and then receives the “strong meat” (Heb. 5:12-14) of the word of God, being “nourished” (1Tim. 4:6) and built up by the word of God, and letting it dwell in them richly. (Col. 3:16) By which word (Scriptures) man is to live by, (Mt. 4:4) as Christ lived by the Father, (Jn. 6:57) with doing His will being His “meat.” (Jn. 4:34) And with the Lord's supper, which is only manifestly described once (besides mention of the "feast of charity" in Jude 1:14) in the life of the church, being that in which the focus is on the church as the body of Christ showing unity with Christ and each other, recognizing others as blood-bought members of that Body by that communal meal, thus effectually remembering and showing/declaring the Lord sacrificial death for the church which He (God) purchased with His own sinless shed blood. (Acts 2:28; cf. 1)t. 2:22-24)
13. Never differentiated between bishops and elders, and with grand titles ("Most Reverend Eminence," “Very Reverend,” “Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord,” “His Eminence Cardinal,” “The Most Reverend the Archbishop,” etc.) or made themselves distinct by their ostentatious pompous garb. (Matthew 23:5-7) Or presumed that all pastors were to be distinctively called “father.” (However, rather than excluding al these titles, I think Mt. 23:8-10 is a form of hyperbole, reproving the love of titles such as Catholicism examples, and “thinking of men above that which is written, and instead the Lord emphasizes the One Father of all who are born of the Spirit, whom He Himself worked to glorify).
14. Never required clerical celibacy as the norm, (1Tim. 3:17) which presumes all such have that gift, (1Cor. 7:7) or otherwise manifested that celibacy was the norm among apostles and pastors, or had vowed to be so. (1Cor. 9:4; Titus 1:5,6)
15. Never supported or made laws that restricted personal reading of Scripture by laity (contrary to Chrysostom), if able and available, sometimes even outlawing it when it was. Instead, the Spirit commends truth-loving souls who searched the OT Scriptures in order to ascertain the veracity of apostolic preaching. (Acts 17:11)
15. Never used the sword of men to deal with its theological dissenters.
17. Never taught that the deity Muslims worship (who is not as an "unknown god") is the same as theirs.
18. Never prayed to anyone in Heaven but the Lord, despite prayer being a most fundamental and common practice, with the Holy Spirit recording approx. 200 prayers in Scripture, nor were we instructed to (i.e. "our Mother who art in Heaven"), even though there were plenty of angels to prayer to, and ascended OT saints after the Lord's resurrection. Moreover, Scripture only manifestly testifies that God alone is able and privileged to hear and respond from Heaven to virtually unlimited prayers addressed to there from earth, mental or vocal, while two-way communication between created beings required both to somehow be in the same location, and was not that of hearing prayer in Heaven (which the offering of prayer in memorial before judgment in Rv. 5:8 and 8:4 does not teach)
19. Never knelled before a statue. praising the entity it represented in the unseen world, even with adulation, attributes, glory and titles never given in Scripture to created beings (except to false gods), including having the uniquely Divine power glory to hear and respond to virtually infinite numbers of prayers addressed to them, and beseeching such for Heavenly help, and making offerings to them. Which would constitute worship in Scripture, yet Catholics imagine by playing word games they avoid crossing the invisible line between mere "veneration" and worship.
20. Never recorded a women who never sinned, and was a perpetual virgin despite being married (contrary to the normal description of marriage, as in leaving and sexually cleaving: Gn. 2:24; cf. Ruth 3:9) and who would be bodily assumed to Heaven (despite lack of evidence) and exalted (officially or with implicit sanction) as,
• an omnipotent (by grace) or almost almighty demigoddess to whom "Jesus owes His Precious Blood" to,
• whose [Mary] merits we are saved by,
• who "had to suffer, as He did, all the consequences of sin,"
• and was bodily assumed into Heaven, which is a fact (unsubstantiated in Scripture or even early Tradition) because the Roman church says it is, and "was elevated to a certain affinity with the Heavenly Father,"
• and whose power now "is all but unlimited,"
• for indeed she "seems to have the same power as God,"
• "surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven,"
• so that "the Holy Spirit acts only by the Most Blessed Virgin, his Spouse."
• and that “sometimes salvation is quicker if we remember Mary's name then if we invoked the name of the Lord Jesus,"
• for indeed saints have "but one advocate," and that is Mary, who "alone art truly loving and solicitous for our salvation,"
• Moreover, "there is no grace which Mary cannot dispose of as her own, which is not given to her for this purpose,"
• and who has "authority over the angels and the blessed in heaven,"
• including "assigning to saints the thrones made vacant by the apostate angels,"
• whom the good angels "unceasingly call out to," greeting her "countless times each day with 'Hail, Mary,' while prostrating themselves before her, begging her as a favour to honour them with one of her requests,"
• and who (obviously) cannot "be honored to excess,"
• and who is (obviously) the glory of Catholic people, whose "honor and dignity surpass the whole of creation." Sources and more.
Historical testimony to the progressive deformation of the church. Including falsified history
Development of the distinctive Catholic priesthood Including compelled clerical celibacy
Long read ... but brilliant!
PING to an excellent post by daniel1212.
I ping you to think deeply about what you've been fed.