BABYLON SCAMYLON

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Last edited:

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Jesus is the New Adam, and like Adam before the Fall, had no sin...
Dodge. Do you work for this company?

Jesus is the "son of Adam" (Luke 3:38), and all sons of Adam came after the fall.

John 15:22 If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.​

Of course Jesus had "no sin":

1 Peter 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:​

Notice what "sin" is:

1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.​

Sin is the transgression of the Law (1 John 3:4), thus commission or omission. I am asking you about "the flesh".

Watch, here is the explanation:

2 Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.​

My question to you, specifically, in your OP was:

"... According to Roman Catholicism, did Jesus take upon Himself fallen flesh (ie likeness of sinful flesh, as Adam after the fall) or unfallen flesh (unsinful flesh, as Adam before the fall)? ..."

I will give you one more try, and then afterward I am simply going to quote Roman Catholic sources.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brakelite

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
7,184
2,534
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Martin Luther started this mess
No, the RCC did when she departed from the teachings of the Bible, just as the prophecies predicted.

The first sign of a religious con artist is the claim that the Vatican sits on the 7 hills of Rome.
The 100 acres of Vatican city today are not what John is describing in Revelation 17 - he is describing the period between the inception of the Papacy in 538 and the "deadly wound" in 1798, when the Papacy did in fact sit upon the entire City of Seven Hills, and wielded unmatched power and influence. The papacy could and did depose kings from their thrones when any dared defy the will of the pope.

Why the cryptic name Babylon?
Because the word is derived from "Babel" which is defined by God as a "place of confusion" and literally translates "Gate to God" ("Bab" and "El").

At the heart of paganism is the idea that we by our own efforts may gain access to God's realm by means other than He alone has prescribed...therefore...there is nothing more fully descriptive of the absolute pathetic condition in which those who believe this pagan doctrine find themselves perhaps hopelessly confused than these two idea combined to form "Babylon" - the "place of religious confusion".

How does this relate to the Antichrist? The future Antichrist will be a world-wide power, essentially pagan
"Anti" means "in place of"; "instead of"; "in behalf of"; "for"
"Christos" means "Christ"

"Antichrist" literally means "in place of Christ". That is exactly what the Papacy has claimed to be for century after century. Even the pope's jewel encrusted mitre has been photographed by countless individuals, including one Pastor Dr. Charles D. Brooks, with the words "Vicarius Filii Dei" on it - it means "Vicar of the Son of God" which means "instead of the Son of God"..."Antichrist".

... and thereby obtaining God's "blessing" on their hatred of the Catholic Church
It is our hatred of unBiblical, blasphemous, God-dishonoring Catholic doctrine that you mistake for hatred of Catholics. If we Protestants truly hated Catholics, our pity for their ignorance of Jesus' invitation to approach Him directly without a single mediator would be turned to satisfaction.

In St. John's letters (1 John 4, 2 John 1), he tells us that the spirit of the Antichrist denies the Incarnation (the Son of God becoming man) and thereby also the Trinity (the Father and the Spirit, too).THIS IS THE SPIRIT OF ANTI-CHRIST.

There is not a single text in 2000 years, including the new Catechism of the Catholic Church, where the Catholic Church, her popes, her bishops, her official teachings, her saints, or her acknowledged ecclesiastical authors, deny the Word-made-flesh or the Blessed Trinity.
The Papacy denies Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. How? By the doctrine of "the Immaculate Conception", whereby Jesus' mother Mary was "conceived spared of the stain of original sin". And, since Mary was "sinless", and Jesus' Heavenly Father was sinless...therefore Jesus did not come in the SAME FLESH as the posterity of Adam..FALLEN FLESH. That is why Catholics are taught that sinners cannot approach Christ directly and may do so only by mediation of His mother or the "saints". If Jesus is in possession of a fleshly nature that was unfallen and therefore immune to the same trials, temptations, and tests as we who, in our fallen fleshly nature are subject, what a monumental occasion for Satan to accuse God as unfair - and what use to us would His sinless example be? Nevertheless, Mary herself exposes the error of this "Immaculate Conception" doctrine by her spirit rejoicing "in God my Savior" - she, like all sinners who repent, acknowledged Jesus as her Savior from her sin.

Instead, all of Christianity owes the preservation of these Truths to the Catholic Church, whose great Councils formulated them and whose saints and popes have defended them to this day, often at the cost of martyrdom.
The Papacy's most learned champion of the day, Johann Eck, matched wits with Martin Luther, and Luther, with the help of Melancthon and company, repeatedly destroyed his arguments with Scripture - to the point that Eck returned and declared to his Catholic counterparts "we cannot match wits these Protestant innovators" and it was decided something else of an authoritative nature must be sought as a means of opposing the Biblical arguments challenging them: tradition, authority of councils, the word of the pope.

"But in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Matthew 15:9 KJV
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: brakelite

Helen

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2011
15,476
21,155
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
@epostle1

Why on earth did you start this thread? Give up on them. :p


. . . . download.jpg
 

Philip James

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2018
4,275
3,091
113
Brandon
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
That is why Catholics are taught that sinners cannot approach Christ directly and may do so only by mediation

Your post is full of lies and this is but an example. If you wish to try and 'correct' us at least speak to what we ACTUALLY teach amd believe rather than your fantasies...

Peace!
 

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The reason Roman Catholicism refuses to answer the question, as I asked, is because it knows that its Dogmatic and "Infallible" teaching of the "Immaculate Conception" of 'Mary' (by her mother, so-called 'Anne' or 'Anna' in their "Tradition"), and the erroneous 'Original Sin' dogma, absolutely fulfill the criteria for Anti-Christ in the Epistles of John, because such teaching denies that Jesus came "in the flesh", that is "the likeness of sinful flesh".

Speaking of the so-called 'Immaculate Conception" (and the so-called dogma of 'Original Sin'):

"... Ineffabilis Deus; The Immaculate Conception; Pope BI. Pius IX - 1854 ...

... Our predecessors, indeed, by virtue of their apostolic authority, gloried in instituting the Feast of the Conception in the Roman Church. They did so to enhance its importance and dignity by a suitable Office and Mass, whereby the prerogative of the Virgin, her exception from the hereditary taint, was most distinctly affirmed. As to the homage already instituted, they spared no effort to promote and to extend it either by the granting of indulgences, or by allowing cities, provinces and kingdoms to choose as their patroness God’s own Mother, under the title of “The Immaculate Conception.” ...

... Finally, in their desire to impress this doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God upon the hearts of the faithful, and to intensify the people’s piety and enthusiasm for the homage and the veneration of the Virgin conceived without the stain of original sin, they delighted to grant, with the greatest pleasure, permission to proclaim the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin in the Litany of Loreto, and in the Preface of the Mass, so that the rule of prayer might thus serve to illustrate the rule of belief. ...

... All these things our illustrious predecessor, Alexander VII, summed up in these words: “We have in mind the fact that the Holy Roman Church solemnly celebrated the Feast of the Conception of the undefiled and ever-Virgin Mary ... We also desired to protect this piety and devotion of venerating and extolling the most Blessed Virgin preserved from original sin ... we renew the Constitutions and Decrees issued by the Roman Pontiffs, our predecessors, especially Sixtus IV,[8] Paul V,[9] and Gregory XV,[10] in favor of the doctrine asserting that the soul of the Blessed Virgin, in its creation and infusion into the body, was endowed with the grace of the Holy Spirit and preserved from original sin ...

... Even the Council of Trent itself, when it promulgated the dogmatic decree concerning original sin, following the testimonies of the Sacred Scriptures, of the Holy Fathers and of the renowned Council, decreed and defined that all men are born infected by original sin; nevertheless, it solemnly declared that it had no intention of including the blessed and immaculate Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, in this decree and in the general extension of its definition. Indeed, considering the times and circumstances, the Fathers of Trent sufficiently intimated by this declaration that the Blessed Virgin Mary was free from the original stain; and thus they clearly signified that nothing could be reasonably cited from the Sacred Scriptures, from Tradition, or from the authority of the Fathers, which would in any way be opposed to so great a prerogative of the Blessed Virgin.[12] ...

... saying, “I will put enmities between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed”[13] — taught that by this divine prophecy the merciful Redeemer of mankind, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, was clearly foretold: That his most Blessed Mother, the Virgin Mary, was prophetically indicated; and, at the same time, the very enmity of both against the evil one was significantly expressed. Hence, just as Christ, the Mediator between God and man, assumed human nature, blotted the handwriting of the decree that stood against us, and fastened it triumphantly to the cross, so the most holy Virgin, united with him by a most intimate and indissoluble bond, was, with him and through him, eternally at enmity with the evil serpent, and most completely triumphed over him, and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot.[14] ...

(just read that last part again)
... Accordingly, the Fathers have never ceased to call the Mother of God the lily among thorns, the land entirely intact, the Virgin undefiled, immaculate, ever blessed, and free from all contagion of sin, she from whom was formed the new Adam, the flawless, brightest, and most beautiful paradise of innocence, immortality and delights planted by God himself and protected against all the snares of the poisonous serpent, the incorruptible wood that the worm of sin had never corrupted, the fountain ever clear and sealed with the power of the Holy Spirit, the most holy temple, the treasure of immortality, the one and only daughter of life — not of death — the plant not of anger but of grace, through the singular providence of God growing ever green contrary to the common law, coming as it does from a corrupted and tainted root. ...

... As if these splendid eulogies and tributes were not sufficient, the Fathers proclaimed with particular and definite statements that when one treats of sin, the holy Virgin Mary is not even to be mentioned; for to her more grace was given than was necessary to conquer sin completely.[24] ...

... They affirmed that the same Virgin is, and is deservedly, the first and especial work of God, escaping the fiery arrows the the evil one; that she is beautiful by nature and entirely free from all stain; that at her Immaculate Conception she came into the world all radiant like the dawn. ..." - - Ineffabilis Deus; The Immaculate Conception; Pope BI. Pius IX - 1854 - http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9ineff.htm
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nancy and brakelite

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Speaking of the so-called 'Immaculate Conception" (and the so-called dogma of 'Original Sin'), continued:

... They have frequently addressed the Mother of God as immaculate, as immaculate in every respect; innocent, and verily most innocent; spotless, and entirely spotless; holy and removed from every stain of sin; all pure, all stainless, the very model of purity and innocence; more beautiful than beauty, more lovely than loveliness; more holy than holiness, singularly holy and most pure in soul and body; the one who surpassed all integrity and virginity; the only one who has become the dwelling place of all the graces of the most Holy Spirit. God alone excepted, Mary is more excellent than all, and by nature fair and beautiful, and more holy than the Cherubim and Seraphim. To praise her all the tongues of heaven and earth do not suffice. ...

(are you hearing the voice of the serpent yet?)
... It was the greatest spiritual joy for us when we heard them ask us to promulgate the dogmatic definition of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mother of God.[28] ...

... “We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful.”[29]

Hence, if anyone shall dare — which God forbid! — to think otherwise than as has been defined by us, let him know and understand that he is condemned by his own judgment; that he has suffered shipwreck in the faith; that he has separated from the unity of the Church; and that, furthermore, by his own action he incurs the penalties established by law if he should are to express in words or writing or by any other outward means the errors he think in his heart. ...

... Let all the children of the Catholic Church, who are so very dear to us, hear these words of ours. With a still more ardent zeal for piety, religion and love, let them continue to venerate, invoke and pray to the most Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, conceived without original sin. Let them fly with utter confidence to this most sweet Mother of mercy and grace in all dangers, difficulties, needs, doubts and fears. Under her guidance, under her patronage, under her kindness and protection, nothing is to be feared; nothing is hopeless. Because, while bearing toward us a truly motherly affection and having in her care the work of our salvation, she is solicitous about the whole human race. And since she has been appointed by God to be the Queen of heaven and earth, and is exalted above all the choirs of angels and saints, and even stands at the right hand of her only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, she presents our petitions in a most efficacious manner. What she asks, she obtains. Her pleas can never be unheard.

Given at St. Peter’s in Rome, the eighth day of December, 1854, in the eighth year of our pontificate.

Pius IX ..." - Ineffabilis Deus; The Immaculate Conception; Pope BI. Pius IX - 1854 - http://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius09/p9ineff.htm
 
  • Like
Reactions: brakelite

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Roman Catholic Catechism on the same subject:

"... 491 Through the centuries the Church has become ever more aware that Mary, "full of grace" through God,134 was redeemed from the moment of her conception. That is what the dogma of the Immaculate Conception confesses, as Pope Pius IX proclaimed in 1854:

The most Blessed Virgin Mary was, from the first moment of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege of almighty God and by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, Savior of the human race, preserved immune from all stain of original sin.135 ...
493 The Fathers of the Eastern tradition call the Mother of God "the All-Holy" (Panagia), and celebrate her as "free from any stain of sin, as though fashioned by the Holy Spirit and formed as a new creature".138 By the grace of God Mary remained free of every personal sin her whole life long. ...

495 Called in the Gospels "the mother of Jesus" ... Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly "Mother of God" (Theotokos).145" ...

499 The deepening of faith in the virginal motherhood led the Church to confess Mary's real and perpetual virginity even in the act of giving birth to the Son of God made man.154 In fact, Christ's birth "did not diminish his mother's virginal integrity but sanctified it."155 And so the liturgy of the Church celebrates Mary as Aeiparthenos, the "Ever-virgin".156 ...

508 From among the descendants of Eve, God chose the Virgin Mary to be the mother of his Son. "Full of grace", Mary is "the most excellent fruit of redemption" (SC 103): from the first instant of her conception, she was totally preserved from the stain of original sin and she remained pure from all personal sin throughout her life.

509 Mary is truly "Mother of God" since she is the mother of the eternal Son of God made man, who is God himself.

510 Mary "remained a virgin in conceiving her Son, a virgin in giving birth to him, a virgin in carrying him, a virgin in nursing him at her breast, always a virgin" (St. Augustine, Serm. 186, 1: PL 38, 999): with her whole being she is "the handmaid of the Lord" (Lk 1:38). ..." - Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church; PART ONE;THE PROFESSION OF FAITH; SECTION TWO; THE PROFESSION OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH; CHAPTER TWO; I BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST, THE ONLY SON OF GOD; ARTICLE 3; "HE WAS CONCEIVED BY THE POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, AND BORN OF THE VIRGIN MARY"; Paragraph 2. "Conceived by the Power of the Holy Spirit and Born of the Virgin Mary" - http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p2.htm
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: brakelite

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Catch what Ineffabilis Deus said earlier about 'Mary' crushing the serpents head.

“It has also been suggested that “Guadalupe” is a corruption of a Nahuatl name “Coatlaxopeuh”, which has been translated as “Who Crushes the Serpent.” [Wikipedia, Guadalupe; referenced from: Mendoza, Rubi. “Coatlaxopeuh or Guadalupe?” xispas.com; in the Jesuit [Catholic] Bible, commonly known as the Douay Rheims in Genesis it is “mysteriously” [inner teaching] quoted as: “I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.” (Genesis 3:15); taken from Douay Rheims Bible Online: http://www.drbo.org/chapter/01003.htm]

Genesis 3:15 Douay Rheims - I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

Genesis 3:15 KING JAMES BIBLE - And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
“The first prophecy referring to Mary is found in the very opening chapters of the Book of Genesis (3:15): “I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed; she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.” This rendering appears to differ in two respects from the original Hebrew text:”, “(2) The second point of difference between the Hebrew text and our version concerns the agent who is to inflict the mortal wound on the serpent: our version agrees with the present Vulgate text in reading “she” (ipsa) which refers to the woman, while the Hebrew text reads hu' (autos, ipse) which refers to the seed of the woman. According to our version, and the Vulgate reading, the woman herself will win the victory; according to the Hebrew text, she will be victorious through her seed. In this sense does the Bull “Ineffabilis” ascribe the victory to Our Blessed Lady. The reading “she” (ipsa) is neither an intentional corruption of the original text, nor is it an accidental error; it is rather an explanatory version expressing explicitly the fact of Our Lady's part in the victory over the serpent, which is contained implicitly in the Hebrew original. The strength of the Christian tradition as to Mary's share in this victory may be inferred from the retention of “she” in St. Jerome's version in spite of his acquaintance with the original text and with the reading “he” (ipse) in the old Latin version.” [The Blessed Virgin Mary, Catholic Encyclopedia; http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15464b.htm]

“Hence, just as Christ, the Mediator between God and man, assumed human nature, blotted the handwriting of the decree that stood against us, and fastened it triumphantly to the cross, so the most holy Virgin, united with him by a most intimate and indissoluble bond, was, with him and through him, eternally at enmity with the evil serpent, and most completely triumphed over him, and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot.” [Quo circa sicut Christus Dei hominumque mediator, humana assumpta natura, delens quod adversus nos erat chirographum decretia, illud cruci triumphator affixit; sic Sanctissima Virgo, Arctissimo et indissolubili vinculo cum eo conjuncta, una cum illo et per illum, sempiternas contra venenosum serpentem inimicitias exercens, ac de ipso plenissime triumphans, illus caput immaculato pede contrivit. Reposted in the Catholic Encyclopedia; Ineffabilis Deus; http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_pi09id.htm]​
 
  • Like
Reactions: brakelite
B

brakelite

Guest
I would particularly like to address those readers such as @Jay Ross and @"ByGrace" of this thread who are critical of so-called "anti-Catholic" sentiments being expressed of late in this forum. @epostle1 began this thread with the statement that he would prove that certain claims against his church are impossible. Please do not get confused into believing such claims are necessarily anti-Catholic. The accusations that are becoming more prolific as we progress that such posts by the "fundies" (not my word) are hate speech and bigotry against individual Catholics. This is a ruse by the Catholics on this forum to foster and encourage your bigotry against their opponents. Allow me to draw your attention to the language thus far used by Epostle1 in this thread.
The forum has indeed been infected by hostile post-enlightenment cults, and misinformed fundamentalists under the spell of the late Dave Hunt.
So there are disease ridden ignorant members of cults practicing witchcraft among us?
Some anti-Catholics claim the Catholic Church
Making it personal...it is not.
contaminate and derail my thread.
Any counter-arguments is a virus? Derail? On the contrary, the more we stick to the actual topic the more we like it...so long as Epostle can.
propagated by anti-Catholics who are ignorant, paranoid and stupid. It's designed to deceive uneducated gullible people like yourself.
That's just plain insulting. THBE is clearly one of the more academically inclined Bible students among us who has yet to lower himself to character assassination in any of his posts. Don't allow epostle to feed your fears and affect your mind towards others. Stay impartial until you weigh the evidence. This is what such discussions are all about. The weight of evidence.
Your walls of anti-Catholic misrepresentations and stupid videos isn't going to impress anybody except your SDA coven. Most Christians on this board are mature enough in the Lord to ignore your psychotic screeching. Back to the iggy bin you go.
Back to insinuations of witchcraft and intellectual disorder. And you "like" this?
Don't bother quoting Catholic sources, you read and format them through the lens of blind prejudice. The topic is how Scripture is twisted and distorted to attack the Catholic Church by whore obsessed biblical illiterates.
This thread is not intended to be a soap box for anti-Catholic pontifications.
Weigh the evidence. Don't allow any blind prejudice to be created in your mind by epostle's insinuations and language techniques designed to harbour that prejudice.

His "proofs" or objections consisted of three elements. First, that the charges against the RCC as being the whore of Babylon or Antichrist (not strictly one and the same) are more recently founded upon a writer by the name of Dave Hunt, and historically Martin Luther. This is incorrect. As THBE showed, such allegations have been levelled against the RCC since the times of the early church fathers. It is nothing new that the RCC has been charged with being the Antichrist. And though Dave Hunt made certain allegations, he is irrelevant to this topic because no-one needs him to draw ones own conclusions regarding these matters.

The second element is founded on the 7 hill concept. THBE has answered this fully and comprehensibly. (You ask THBE a question and he will provide a thorough answer. Don't deny THBE his dues just because his answers are so thorough and detailed.) Besides, the 7 hill issue is just a minor detail among numerous and more important criteria regarding Rome.

The third element Epostle seems reluctant to answer; obfuscating and clouding the issue. And no wonder. Because if understood correctly, what @epostle1 believes to be his best objection to the challenges against his church is in fact that strongest evidence for those challenges. The particular matter that eposte 1 brought up, notice he brought up this topic, that the RCC cannot be the Antichrist are based on the following scriptures....
1Jo 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
1Jo 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2Jo 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

If you really desire to understand this issue, here lies the crucial information you need top understand. Notice that Epostle 1 is giving these texts a certain "sound". He is making them say something they are not. He is claiming these texts allude to the trinity, and/or Christ's actual incarnation. Please take careful (and prayerful) note of THBE's answer. I have dealt with this before on these forums, but I am comfident THBE will do a far better job than I. IN the interests of true identification of Antichrist, this is an important issue. Very important.
 

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Again, notice:

Every Christian land is a Marian land; there is not a nation redeemed in the blood of Christ which does not glory in proclaiming Mary its Mother and Patroness.”, “Here they invoke Notre Dame de Misericorde [Our Lady of Mercy], de Toute Aide [of All Help], de Bon Secours [of Prompt Succor]. There the pilgrim seeks refuge near Notre Dame de la Garde [Our Lady of Watchfulness], de Pitie, or de Consolation. Elsewhere the pilgrim's prayer rises to Notre Dame de Lumiere [Our Lady of Light], de Paix, de Joie, or d'Esperance [of Hope]. Or he implores the intercession of Notre Dame des Vertus, des Miracles, or des Victoires. It is a wonderful litany of invocations whose unceasing recital tells, from province to province, the blessings which the Mother of God has bestowed on the land of France through the ages.”, “To mention but a single instance, everyone is familiar today with the miraculous medal.” This medal, with its image of Mary conceived without sin, was revealed to a humble daughter of Saint Vincent de Paul whom We had the joy of inscribing in the catalogue of Saints, and it has spread its spiritual and material wonders everywhere.”, “Nor will anyone ever know, We might add, the full sum of the benefits which the world owes to the aid of the Virgin! “O specus felix, decorate divae Matris aspectu! Veneranda rupes, unde vitales scatuere pleno gurgite Iymhae!””, “The Virgin Mary herself desired this title. “What the Sovereign Pontiff defined in Rome through his infallible Magisterium, the Immaculate Virgin Mother of God, blessed among all women, wanted to confirm by her own words, it seems, when shortly afterward she manifested herself by a famous apparition at the grotto of Massabielle. . .” Certainly the infallible word of the Roman Pontiff, the authoritative interpreter of revealed truth, needed no heavenly confirmation that it might be accepted by the faithful. But with what emotion and gratitude did the Christian people and their pastors receive from the lips of Bernadette this answer which came from heaven: I am the Immaculate Conception!”, “The fiftieth anniversary of the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin gave Saint Pius X occasion to bear witness in a solemn document to the historic connection between this act of the Magisterium and the apparitions at Lourdes. “Pius IX,” he wrote, “had hardly defined it to be of Catholic faith that Mary was from her very origin exempt from sin, when the Virgin herself began performing miracles at Lourdes.””, ““We turned Our mind and heart to Lourdes where, four years after the definition of the dogma, the Immaculate Virgin herself gave supernatural confirmation to the declaration of the Supreme Teacher, by appearances, conversations, and miracles.””, “Go to her, you who are crushed by material misery, defenseless against the hardships of life and the indifference of men. Go to her, you who are assailed by sorrows and moral trials. Go to her, beloved invalids and infirm, you who are sincerely welcomed and honored at Lourdes as the suffering members of our Lord. Go to her and receive peace of heart, strength for your daily duties, joy for the sacrifice you offer.”, ““Amid dangers, difficulties, and doubts, think of Mary, invoke Mary's aid.... If you follow her, you will not stray; if you entreat her, you will not lose hope; if you reflect upon her, you will not err; if she supports you, you will not fall; if she protects you, you will not fear; if she leads you, you will not grow weary; if she is propitious, you will reach your goal....” Second Homily on the Missus est: PL CLXXXIII, 70-71.” [Le Pelerinage de Lourdes; Encyclical Warning Against Materialism; His Holiness Pope Pius XII; Promulgated on July 2, 1957; reposted Catholic Encyclopedia; http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_pi12lp.htm

[NOTE: also notice the capitals “We”, “Us”, “Our” and “Ourselves” which refers to the Pope in most encyclical letters or decrees, which is in direct copy of God in the Bible, “Let Us make man in Our image...”, the Popes are being subtle but are still referring to themselves as God, as Pope Leo boldly declared outright. And since "all the names" which belong to Christ, the same names are given to the 'pope' as Cardinal Bellarmine said.]
“We believe that Mary is the Mother, who remained ever a Virgin, of the Incarnate Word, our God and Savior Jesus Christ, and that by reason of this singular election, she was, in consideration of the merits of her Son, redeemed in a more eminent manner, preserved from all stain of original sin and filled with the gift of grace more than all other creatures. Joined by a close and indissoluble bond to the Mysteries of the Incarnation and Redemption, the Blessed Virgin, the Immaculate, was at the end of her earthly life raised body and soul to heavenly glory and likened to her risen Son in anticipation of the future lot of all the just; and we believe that the Blessed Mother of God, the New Eve, Mother of the Church, continues in heaven her maternal role with regard to Christ's members, cooperating with the birth and growth of divine life in the souls of the redeemed.” - The Credo of the People of God, Promulgated by Pope Paul VI on June 30, 1968, Catholic Encyclopedia - http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_pa06cr.htm
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: brakelite

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
“Do you ask me, is Mary willing to assist you? Does she really take an interest in your welfare? Or is she so much absorbed by the fruition of God as to be indifferent to our miseries? “Can a woman forget her infant so as not to have pity on the fruit of her womb?” (Isaiah 49:15), Even so Mary will not forget us” [“Faith of our Fathers, By Cardinal James Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, page 225, 1893 ed.] - https://books.google.com/books?id=HHNIBAAAQBAJ&q=Can+a+woman+forget#v=snippet&q=Can a woman forget&f=false

Isaiah actually says

Isaiah 45:19 KJB - Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I (JEHOVH Elohiym, even Jesus Christ) not forget thee.
They always ascribe to 'Mary' what belongs to Jesus Christ! Why? It is because the 'apparition' of Rome, is none other than Satan himself. masquerading as another, an "angel/messenger of light". Look at the titles and functions this 'apparition' ascribes to itself.

Now let us deal with the flesh of Jesus as scripture gives and compare to what Roman Catholicism has stated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brakelite

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Jesus is not a sinner, though he had taken on the likeness of sinful flesh as we have. When the text says, "All have sinned ...", Jesus is excluded, as other texts reveal:

Hebrews 2:16 KJB - For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.​

The question then is, what kind of nature do unfallen [ooops, I gave it away] Heavenly Angels have, as opposed to every child of fallen Adam, and since Jesus did not take on that nature of Heavenly angels, that only leaves the other.

Romans 1:3 KJB - Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;​

If it were not so, Jesus could never have "condemned sin in the flesh", being His flesh that He took upon Himself.

Romans 8:3 KJB - For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:​

[for "likeness" see Philippians 2:7; Romans 6:5]​

Keep in mind this text always:

John 3:6 KJB - That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.​

It really is simple, eh?

1 Peter 4:1 KJB - Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;

Hebrews 2:17 KJB - Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

Galatians 4:4 KJB - But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

Romans 5:19 KJB - For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.​

The so-called Evangelical 'gospel' is no Gospel at all when compared to the infinite value of the True and Everlasting Gospel...

LIKENESS OF SINFUL FLESH


The lineage of Jesus given in both Matthew [Matthew 1:1-18; "son of David, the son of Abraham"] and Luke [Luke 3:23-38; "[son of] Adam", etc] is easily seen in the lives and history of Jesus' ancestors, of which He Himself inherited of their fleshly nature when He was made of a woman.

Jesus has for flesh and blood ancestors, murderers, thieves, harlots, idolators, etc, but none of that makes Him as such [a sinner], but He did and does inherit the flesh and blood, fallen flesh nature, like as we. For He was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin, and His temptations were far greater [not less].

How many sons of Adam were born from Adam after His sin? All of them, including all of us here, and also Jesus, being born of Mary [Matthew 1:16], who was of the line, the seed according to the flesh, of David.

David acknowledges his heritage in the Psalms, and Jesus is called the "son of David", and also the "son of Abraham". Did they have sinful flesh? Were they born after Adam's fall? Yes.

To be born with sinful flesh is not to be born with the guilt of sin/transgression. The scripture teaches that to [commit] sin [of comission or omission] is to be a transgressor [of the Law], not simply being born with sinful flesh.

If all will go with me to other scriptures please, where it describes this "flesh" [sarx]:

"And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us..." [John 1:14]

"GOD manifest in the flesh" [1 Timothy 3:16],

"the LORD from Heaven" [1 Corinthians 15:47],

"made of a woman" [Galatians 4:4],

"made of the seed of David according to the flesh" [Romans 1:3],

"...to every seed his own body..." [1 Corinthians 15:38],

"...of the fruit of his [David's] loins, according to the flesh..." [Acts 2:30]

of the "seed of Abraham" [Hebrews 2:16],

even "as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same" [Hebrews 2:14] [what flesh are we born with, that He partook of then, what blood?]

and "in all things it behoved him to be made like unto [his] brethren" [Hebrews 2:17],

that we might have "...known Christ after the flesh..." [2 Corinthians 5:16],

and scripture giving us the family line and genealogy of that very flesh [sarx] and blood nature He took upon Himself [Matthew 1:1-25; Luke 3:23-38]

the "[the son] of Adam" [Luke 3:38]

as it is said, "made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" [Philippians 2:7],

and "...in the days of His flesh..." [Hebrews 5:7],

"was in all points tempted like as [we are yet] without sin" [Hebrews 4:15],

and in His death it is written, "...my flesh shall rest in hope..." [Acts 2:26], and

"...his soul [being/person] was not left in the grave, neither his flesh did see corruption..." [Acts 2:31] because He was/is...

"holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners" [Hebrews 7:26]

that "holy thing" [Luke 1:35]

and "holy child" [Acts 4:27,30]

born of the "Holy Ghost" [Matthew 1:18; Luke 1:35],
...to be continued ...
 

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
LIKENESS OF SINFUL FLESH continued ...

where even though He came in the likeness [Romans 8:3; Philippians 2:7; etc] of sinful flesh, yet He was without sin:

"...lamb shall be without blemish..." [Exodus 12:5]

"… But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none." [Matthew 26:60]

"...the innocent blood..." [Matthew 27:4]

"...For he knew that for envy they had delivered him. ..." [Matthew 27:18]

"… Have thou nothing to do with that just man …" [Matthew 27:19]

"… Why, what evil hath he done? …" [Matthew 27:23]

"… I am innocent of the blood of this just person …" [Matthew 27:24]

"The said Pilate … I find no fault in this man.” [Luke 23:4]

"… Said unto them, Ye have brought this man unto me, as one that perverteth the people: and, behold, I, having examined him before you, have found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him:" [Luke 23:14]

"… what evil hath he done? I have found no cause of death in him ..." [Luke 23:22]

"...lo, nothing worthy of death is done unto him." [Luke 23:15]

"...this man hath done nothing amiss." [Luke 23:41]

"… Now when the centurion saw what was done, he glorified God, saying, Certainly this was a righteous man." [Luke 23:47]

"...I have kept my Father's commandments..." [John 15:10]

"...I find in him no fault [at all]." [John 18:38]

"...I find no fault in him." [John 19:4]

"...I find no fault in him." [John 19:6]

"...the obedience of one..." [Romans 5:19]

"...who knew no sin..." [2 Corinthians 5:21]

"...without sin." [Hebrews 4:15]

"...[who is] holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners..." [Hebrews 7:26]

"Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:" [1 Peter 2:22]

"...in him is no sin." [1 John 3:5]

"How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God..." [Hebrews 9:4;p]

...and thereby, in the same likeness of sinful flesh as we, yet living without sin, never having sinned, never once transgressed the Holy Law of God; Jesus showed that with God there is no excuse for sin and thus "...condemned sin in the flesh." [Romans 8:3];

"...having crucified the flesh..." [Galatians 5:24],

and "...nailing it to His cross." [Colossians 2:4],

"Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh..." [1 Peter 4:1];

even "...being put to death in the flesh..." [1 Peter 3:18],

and we are to be "...crucified with Christ..." [Galatians 5:24],

"In the body of His flesh through death..." [Colossians 1:22],

become dead to the penalty of the Law, the 2nd Death, "...by the body of Christ..." [Romans 7:4],

that we might be "...members of His body, and of His flesh, and of His bones." [Ephesians 5:30],

by a "...new and living way, which He hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, His flesh;" [Hebrews 10:20]

so that we may know this, "...Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [him], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." [Romans 6:6]

"Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:" [Hebrews 10:5]

"Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed." [1 Peter 2:24]

"By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all]." [Hebrews 10:10]

Therefore, we have this hope, "Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself." [Philippians 3:21]

Therefore, it is very important to understand with what flesh Jesus came, not only to the Everlasting Gospel [Genesis 3:15; Revelation 14:6-7, etc], and how Christ Jesus is to save us from sin [Matthew 1:21; not in it] and to redeem us unto God, it is written,

"Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:" [1 John 4:2]

What flesh is John speaking about? The very likeness of sinful flesh we have, of the race of Adam, for he says, "...our hands have handled, of the Word of life." [1 John 1:1]

And it is written of those which refuse this, "And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that [spirit] of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." [1 John 4:3]

"For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist." [2 John 1:7]​

And who teaches that Jesus did not come in that sinful flesh?

The Mother of Harlots [Revelation 17], through its particular Dogma...

...and also her harlot daughters ...

...there are many "...not discerning the Lord's body." [1 Corinthians 11:29]

Please read Romans 5 carefully and prayerfully, and especially see Romans 5:19 and read it several times and come to understand what it is powerfully saying, along with all the places in Revelation which speaks about over coming, even as He overcame in the flesh.
 
B

brakelite

Guest
Your post is full of lies and this is but an example. If you wish to try and 'correct' us at least speak to what we ACTUALLY teach amd believe rather than your fantasies...

Peace!
THBE, in presenting what you ACTUALLY teach, is destroying your fantasies. What THBE is presenting is what the RCC teaches...do you agree or disagree with what these official teachings are saying? Has an image of Mary usurped the place of Christ in the minds and hearts of Catholic faithful???? Because the way I read the above quotes from Catholic sources it is your church that has so exalted Mary as to make her a sinless mediator with the full responsibility of caring for the church. If that isn't Antichrist, (instead of Christ) nothing else could be.
 

TheHolyBookEnds

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2018
545
161
63
Neighbour
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Roman Catholicism Dogma's deny "the flesh" that Jesus took upon Himself, and in so doing, drastically alters the Gospel, and forever separates Jesus from touching humanity where needful.

1 John 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

1 John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

2 John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
Their Dogma substitutes the real 'flesh' of Jesus (fallen, likeness of sinful flesh tso that He could condemn sin in the flesh (otherwise you have excuse for not overcoming (yet there is no excuse, Jesus gave the example of overcoming; Revelation 3:21; John 16:33))) and thus negates victory/overcoming of sin in the flesh we have, and every other error follows in its train, auricular confession, etc.
 
B

brakelite

Guest
THBE doesnt have a clue what the church teaches or believes... Do you?
You disagree with his sources, or what the sources are saying? You say he doesn't have a clue. So, give us an example of what he is saying in his quotes actually differs from Catholic teaching.
 

Philip James

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2018
4,275
3,091
113
Brandon
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
You disagree with his sources, or what the sources are saying? You say he doesn't have a clue. So, give us an example of what he is saying in his quotes actually differs from Catholic teaching.

So many to choose from ...

Roman Catholicism Dogma's deny "the flesh" that Jesus took upon Himself

The idea that Catholics deny the incarnation is frankly ridiculous...

Peace!