Mark of the Beast = Cain's Mark

  • 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!

Elle

Member
Sep 27, 2012
118
10
18
May want to read this first: http://www.sabbathcovenant.com/newdoctrine/jesus_christ_is_the_antichrist.htm

The mark of the beast is the very same mark set upon Cain thousands of years ago. This mark identified who his father was, and it was not Adam, and would cause the people created on the 6th day to fear him. It did not ensure that he would not be killed, just that if he was slayed, vengeance would be meted out sevenfold. His mark was the Greek letter "XI" which is a coiled snake letting you know he is of his father the devil/serpent/dragon. From this one mark a religion formed around it, this religion was carried over the flood and took root in Babel, of whom the founder was Nimrod. Nimrod's mother, Semiramis, added her own twist to this religion. She had Nimrod killed, when her unborn child was born she declared to the people that Tammuz was Nimrod reborn. This is the first trinity.

Noah's descendants were supposed to divide into their rightful nations as God had spoken it, but they didn't. They instead chose to build a tower to try and reach heaven to keep from being scattered. When God came down, he thwarted their plans, changed their tongues and sent them to where they were suppose to go. However, they carried with them the religion refined by Semiramis. Every culture has these same 3 false gods upon which a religion was built around them.

The foundational religion was the one founded by Cain, it is a masculine religion. This is the one Nimrod hoped to carry on, but his mother/wife had other ideas. Semiramis did not want to be subject to a male dominated religion and instead put herself on top creating a feminine religion. The story is almost always the same with a few details changed.

Babylon's trinity was Nimrod, Tammuz and Semiramis
Assyria's trinity was Ashur the father, Ashur the son and Ishtar
Egypt's trinity was Osiris, Horus and Isis
Mede-Persia's trinity was Ahura Mazda, Mithra and Apam Napat
Greece's trinity was Zeus, Apollo and Athena
Rome's trinity was Jupiter, Mars and Venus
Constantine switched the god's out for Jehovah, Jesus and the Holy Spirit found under Catholicism.

The seven heads on the scarlet beast are Assyria, Babylon, Mede-Persia, Greece, Rome and the United States. Each one of these kingdoms has 2 things in common, the trinity and each one ruled over God's people at some point in history.

Before Constantine and the RCC came along, their was a man named Saul who changed his name to Paul trying to appear humble for "Paul" means small or least. Paul was a misogynist and felt women should be quiet in the churches and cover their heads. What Paul was really doing was trying to elevate the masculine, beast system founded by Cain by throwing the whore off the back of Cain's religion. Almost all Christian churches put more emphasis on Paul's words than they do Yeshua's words. Paul's words were accepted by the churches, but not his hatred of women. The RCC has since elevated Mary to a co-saviour. God's word was manifested in the vessel of Yeshua, a man and nothing more. He was not God, he spoke God's word through the Holy Spirit given to him at his baptism. Paul turned Yeshua into the false, male, god named Jesus created aeons ago.

Moving forward in time to the 7 headed lion/bear/leopard beast, we see that the division with the sword to the 7th head, caused by political correctness manifested under the Babylonian system, will be healed. As I explained in a previous post, the 10 horns/kings/tribes of Israel were overpowered by God do do his will when he put it into their minds to give their power to the earth beast by voting for him. God's purpose for doing this was because God's people hate the feminine, Babylonian system ruling over them. This system does nothing but promote reliance upon the government to take care of you, it elevates every imaginable perversion under the sun creating nothing but weak 19+ year old adult babies. God's people can't stand this system, so in enters Trump, the AC, the false prophet and the earth beast. He, through the power of the people, will destroy this adult daycare system and replace it with the one founded by Cain, who Paul tried to resurrect, but couldn't, until America was founded. Paul also managed to get people to follow his plan of easy salvation, which doesn't require you to follow God's law. Anyhow, Trump will throw the mother whore off of this nanny state and replace it with the masculine system, he will put the whore under his feet and bring forth the masculine system on which this country was founded. The feminine aspect will have limited power. Problem is, it still does not worship the true God. The people will still worship the false Sun(day) god disguised by the name "Jesus", who is not Yeshua. Paul is the founder of Christianity, picked up and feminized by Constantine, carried on by the RCC who eventually managed to corrupt the churches that came forth out of the Protestant Reformation. The Christian "Jesus" is the beast of old, his mark is the Greek letters chi-xi-sigma. You may have heard recently how Trump wants to bring back saying "Merry Christmas" and is defending the celebration of Christmas, that's just the beginning. Trump is a human manifestation of a type of Cain/Nimrod/Paul, him and his ego will divide the land for gain and deceive you into to worshipping the false god Jesus when he re-establishes a Christian Masculine America with the Adulterous Woman underneath.

Moving on to the mark in more detail.

The mark is not a literal mark, it is a spiritual mark. He does not force the mark, he causes via deceiving the people to take it.
I will try and prove to you using scripture what the mark means. First of all, the question must be asked: “Why can’t those who are not marked, buy and sell?” Everything about why they cannot buy and sell revolves around the 4th commandment:
Exo 20:8-11:
“Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Six days shalt thou labour, and DO ALL THY WORK:
But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt NOT DO ANY WORK, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”


You probably don’t see it yet. In Neh 10:31 it says:
“And if the people of the land bring ware or any victuals ON THE SABBATH DAY TO SELL, that WE WOULD NOT BUY IT OF THEM ON THE SABBATH, or on the holy day: and that we would leave the seventh year, and the exaction of every debt.”


And finally Amos 8:4-5:
“Hear this, O ye that swallow up the needy, even to make the poor of the land to fail, Saying, When will the new moon be gone, that WE MAY SELL CORN? and THE SABBATH, THAT WE MAY SET FORTH WHEAT, making the ephah small, and the shekel great, and falsifying the balances by deceit?”


By now a picture should be developing in your mind. God forbid working on the Sabbath, no working, means no buying and selling. The last example shows how the Israelites were impatient for the Sabbath and new moon to be over with so they could go sell their wares deceitfully. So, the reason the people who do not take the mark can’t buy and sell is because they honor the 7th day Sabbath, which is Friday sunset to Saturday sunset. Do not let anyone tell you that the Sabbath was changed, it is a lie. Do not let anyone tell you that any day out of 7 is OK, that too is a lie. If you read my other post, you might remember where I said that Trump’s definition of MAGA is to go back before political correctness wounded the United States. He wants to return America back to that time, hence the AGAIN part. To MAGA, there had to be a time in his life when he thought America was great, somewhere be 1955 to 1988 would be my guess (actually, much earlier). I can almost guarantee that a Sunday law will be enacted. Which is fine for Christians who believe that that is the correct day. The sheep hear Yeshua’s voice, not Paul, not the RCC, not the beast, but Yeshua. Many like to point to how Yeshua supposedly broke the Sabbath as proof. It proves the exact opposite. The Pharisees built a hedge around the Law with all these non-sensical rules that were not of God. For instance, when Yeshua and the disciples were going through the grain fields on the Sabbath, the disciples were picking grain and eating it. The Pharisees said that they were doing what was NOT LAWFUL on the Sabbath. According to who? That was one of their laws that they added to God’s Law. Picking grain is not labor intensive, they were not harvesting the grain. Furthermore, God allowed for the picking of grain for the poor and the traveler:
Lev 19:10: “And thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, neither shalt thou gather every grape of thy vineyard; thou shalt leave them for the poor and stranger (sojourner/traveler): I am the LORD your God.” They broke the Pharisees’ law, not God’s. Yeshua clarified what was acceptable to God in Matt 12:12. “It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath”. You can help someone pull an ox out of a ditch, you can heal, you can share God’s word. You do not buy and sell on the Sabbath, cooking should be done the day before, no labor intensive work. However, lets say you have a friend whose car just broke down on Friday before the Sabbath. He needs it to get to work on Monday because he is not well off financially. He can’t afford for someone to fix it, nor could he afford a rental. If you, as his friend, were capable of helping fix his car so he could get to work on Monday, that would be acceptable. You would be showing mercy for your fellow man. It is not acceptable to go to a restaurant and expect other people to wait on you. People do not like the 7th day sabbath, it interferes with their social lives, their shopping day or projects that need to be done around the house that are not of a pressing matter. If the work involved can be considered merciful and good, have at it. God already defined for us what we could not do, not what we can do. The mark just show where your allegiance lies, are you working for God or the beast?


The number of his name is not 666, but Chi-Xi-Stigma. John did not see a number he saw Greek letters and that is how it should have been translated. If you look at the root word etymology for Chi-Xi-Stigma, you will see it is made up of 4 Greek words: ἄγαμος, ἀγαθοεργέω ἀββα and Ἄβελ. Each one means something different. The first “ἄγαμος” is Strong’s G22 and its Biblical usage is: unmarried, unwedded, single. The 2nd “ἀγαθοεργέω” is Strong’s G14 and its Biblical usage is: to work good, to do good, to do well, act rightly. The 3rd “ἀββα” is Strong’s G5 and its Biblical usage is: Abba = “father”. The final word ” Ἄβελ” is Strong’s G6 and its Biblical usage is: Abel = “vanity (that is: transitory)”. If you put them in a sentence you get: Those who are “NOT MARRIED” to Yeshua who ‘DO GOOD WORKS” for the “FATHER” do it all in “VAIN”. Now read Mat 7:22-23: “Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”
As Yeshua says in Mat 7:13-14: Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Many professing Christians will not be going through the narrow gate, they are on the broad road that leads to destruction.

Why? Because they continue to work lawlessness, (without Law) precisely, God’s Law. They prefer to decide for themselves what is right and what is wrong. God says honor the Sabbath, they choose Sunday. God says don’t eat pig, they eat pig. God says not to have any false gods before him, they honor Mithra at Christmas and Ashtoreth at Easter, they put Trump on a pedestal. God says not to make any graven images, they make an image of a man on a cross and bow down and worship before it. God says not to covet (desire) your neighbor’s property, they can’t stand that Jack down the street has a much nicer car than they do, so they go to the bank and take out a loan that they really can’t afford to buy a better car than Jack has.

Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count (reckon) the number (multitude) of the beast: for it is the number (multitude) of a man (False Jesus); and his number (multitude) is Six hundred threescore and six (Chi-Xi-Stigma: Those who are “NOT MARRIED” to Yeshua who ‘DO GOOD WORKS” for the “FATHER” do it all in “VAIN”.)
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The Egyptians had an Ennead—a pantheon of nine major gods and goddesses. Osiris, Isis, and Horus were simply three divinities in the pantheon who were closely related by marriage and blood (not surprising, since the Ennead itself was an extended family) and who figured in the same myth cycle. They did not represent the three persons of a single divine being (the Christian understanding of the Trinity). The claim of an Egyptian trinity is simply wrong. There is no parallel.
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/is-catholicism-pagan

Paul was always subject the Church, not the other way around.

"The RCC has since elevated Mary to a co-saviour" is false propaganda.

"Paul turned Yeshua into the false, male, god named Jesus created aeons ago" means you deny the pre-existence of Christ, and don't think much of Paul who did no such thing.

The shift from the Saturday sabbath to Sunday worship was done by the Apostles.

Jesus Christ is the founder of Christianity, not Paul, and not Constantine. "Yeshua" is Aramaic, but you use the term to give yourself a veneer of authenticity. "Kepha" is also Aramaic, so you should avoid using that term because the Aramaic "Kepha" has no constructive pronouns, no petra/petros. Jesus said "You are Kepha and on this Kepha I will build my Church. We know what a rock is. Your usage of the Aramaic is highly selective. Jesus builds his Church on Peter, not on some emperor 300 years later who had no spiritual authority. Myths about Constantine abound.

"they honor Mithra at Christmas and Ashtoreth at Easter" is laughable.

I would challenge your abuse of scripture line by line, but the post would be 5 miles long. I don't need to discredit you further, you've done that to yourself. You are a product of sola scriptura where anybody can invent bizarre wackiness.


picard_pagan.jpg
 

Elle

Member
Sep 27, 2012
118
10
18
You said: "The Egyptians had an Ennead—a pantheon of nine major gods and goddesses. Osiris, Isis, and Horus were simply three divinities in the pantheon who were closely related by marriage and blood (not surprising, since the Ennead itself was an extended family) and who figured in the same myth cycle. They did not represent the three persons of a single divine being (the Christian understanding of the Trinity). The claim of an Egyptian trinity is simply wrong. There is no parallel.
http://www.catholic....tholicism-pagan"

Means little what the RCC says, the fact remains that Osiris, Isis and Horus represented their trinity.

You said "Paul was always subject (to) the Church, not the other way around."

No he was not, Paul founded Christianity. Yeshua never came to find a religion, he was the light contained within the Son (sun) whose light came to reveal and point back to the OT (moon).

You quoted me: "The RCC has since elevated Mary to a co-saviour" is false propaganda."

Really?

"In his Ineffabilis Deus in 1854, Pope Pius IX established as dogma the immaculate conception of Mary, which preserved her from inheriting original sin. His concluding statements provide a good summary of the Catholic view of Mary."


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.

You quoted me: ""Paul turned Yeshua into the false, male, god named Jesus created aeons ago" means you deny the pre-existence of Christ, and don't think much of Paul who did no such thing."

Yes, I do deny the pre-existence of Yeshua if you mean that he existed with the Father before he was born. He was already a foreordained part of God's plan before he was born, but never existed with the Father. That is exactly what Paul did. No, I think absolutely nothing of Paul. He was a liar.

You said: "The shift from the Saturday sabbath to Sunday worship was done by the Apostles."

No it was not. The RCC even admits that they changed the Sabbath to Sunday. It started with Constantine and was made official by the RCC.

"When Emperor Constantine I—a pagan sun-worshipper—came to power in A.D. 313, he legalized Christianity and made the first Sunday-keeping law. His infamous Sunday enforcement law of March 7, A.D. 321, reads as follows: “On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed.” (Codex Justinianus 3.12.3, trans. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 5th ed. (New York, 1902), 3:380, note 1.)

The Sunday law was officially confirmed by the Roman Papacy. The Council of Laodicea in A.D. 364 decreed, “Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honour, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ” (Strand, op. cit., citing Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, 2 [Edinburgh, 1876] 316).

Cardinal Gibbons, in Faith of Our Fathers, 92nd ed., p. 89, freely admits, “You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we [the Catholic Church] never sanctify.”

Again, “The Catholic Church, … by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday” (The Catholic Mirror, official publication of James Cardinal Gibbons, Sept. 23, 1893).

“Protestants do not realize that by observing Sunday, they accept the authority of the spokesperson of the Church, the Pope” (Our Sunday Visitor, February 5, 1950).

“Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change [Saturday Sabbath to Sunday] was her act... And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical authority in religious things” (H.F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons).

“Sunday is our mark of authority… the church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact” (Catholic Record of London, Ontario Sept 1, 1923)."

You said: "Jesus Christ is the founder of Christianity, not Paul, and not Constantine. "Yeshua" is Aramaic, but you use the term to give yourself a veneer of authenticity. "Kepha" is also Aramaic, so you should avoid using that term because the Aramaic "Kepha" has no constructive pronouns, no petra/petros. Jesus said "You are Kepha and on this Kepha I will build my Church. We know what a rock is. Your usage of the Aramaic is highly selective. Jesus builds his Church on Peter, not on some emperor 300 years later who had no spiritual authority. Myths about Constantine abound."

No, Yeshua is not the founder of Christianity, they were first called Christians at Antioch, that should wave a red flag. I use "Yeshua" because that is his name, not Jesus. What Yeshua was building his church upon was the truth of Peter's revelation that he (Yeshua) was the Son of the Living God. Yeshua was the rock upon whom the church would be built. https://carm.org/is-peter-the-rock

You quoted me" ""they honor Mithra at Christmas and Ashtoreth at Easter" is laughable."

Your denial is more laughable. You have Google at your fingertips to easily search this out and yet you prefer to cling to your "traditions of men".

You said: "I would challenge your abuse of scripture line by line, but the post would be 5 miles long. I don't need to discredit you further, you've done that to yourself. You are a product of sola scriptura where anybody can invent bizarre wackiness."

Better for me to be a sheep rather than a goat.
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Elle said:
You said: "The Egyptians had an Ennead—a pantheon of nine major gods and goddesses. Osiris, Isis, and Horus were simply three divinities in the pantheon who were closely related by marriage and blood (not surprising, since the Ennead itself was an extended family) and who figured in the same myth cycle. They did not represent the three persons of a single divine being (the Christian understanding of the Trinity). The claim of an Egyptian trinity is simply wrong. There is no parallel.
http://www.catholic....tholicism-pagan"
Means little what the RCC says, the fact remains that Osiris, Isis and Horus represented their trinity.
Try an encyclopedia.


You said "Paul was always subject (to) the Church, not the other way around."

No he was not, Paul founded Christianity. Yeshua never came to find a religion, he was the light contained within the Son (sun) whose light came to reveal and point back to the OT (moon).
Wrong.

It is incorrect to regard St. Paul as some kind of spiritual “lone ranger,” on his own with no particular ecclesiastical allegiance, since he was commissioned by Jesus Himself as an Apostle.
  • In his very conversion experience, Jesus informed Paul that he would be told what to do (Acts 9:6; cf.9:17). WHO TOLD HIM TO DO WHAT?
  • He went to see St. Peter in Jerusalem for fifteen days in order to be confirmed in his calling (Galatians 1:18),
  • and fourteen years later was commissioned by Peter, James, and John (Galatians 2:1-2,9).
  • He was also sent out by the Church at Antioch (Acts 13:1-4), which was in contact with the Church at Jerusalem (Acts 11:19-27).
  • Later on, Paul reported back to Antioch (Acts 14:26-28).
  • Acts 15:2 states: “. . . Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question.”
  • The next verse refers to Paul and Barnabas “being sent on their way by the church.”
Paul did what he was told to do by the Jerusalem Council (where he played no huge role),
and Paul and Barnabas were sent off, or commissioned by the council (15:22-27), and shared its binding teachings in their missionary journeys: “. . . delivered to them for observance the decisions which had been reached by the apostles and elders who were at Jerusalem” (Acts 16:4).


The Jerusalem Council certainly regarded its teachings as infallible, and guided by the Holy Spirit Himself. The records we have of it don’t even record much discussion about biblical prooftexts, and the main issue was circumcision (where there is a lot of Scripture to draw from). Paul accepted its authority and proclaimed its teachings (Acts 16:4).

Furthermore, Paul appears to be passing on his office to Timothy (1 Tim 6:20; 2 Tim 1:6, 13-14; 2 Tim 4:1-6), and tells him to pass his office along, in turn (2 Tim 2:1-2) which would be another indication of apostolic succession in the Bible.

The attempt to pretend that St. Paul was somehow on his own, disconnected to the institutional Church, has always failed, as unbiblical.

you quoted me: "The RCC has since elevated Mary to a co-saviour" is false propaganda."
Really?"

In his Ineffabilis Deus in 1854, Pope Pius IX established as dogma the immaculate conception of Mary, which preserved her from inheriting original sin. His concluding statements provide a good summary of the Catholic view of Mary."

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.
That says nothing about co-savior. Mary can't do anything without God so hostile anti-Catholics get into a big flap about nothing.
You quoted me: ""Paul turned Yeshua into the false, male, god named Jesus created aeons ago" means you deny the pre-existence of Christ, and don't think much of Paul who did no such thing."

Yes, I do deny the pre-existence of Yeshua if you mean that he existed with the Father before he was born. He was already a foreordained part of God's plan before he was born, but never existed with the Father. That is exactly what Paul did. No, I think absolutely nothing of Paul. He was a liar.
What all this amounts to is rebellion. Modernism is another word for it. If Paul was a liar why bother making Bible references? Did you ever play with Ouija boards?
You said: "The shift from the Saturday sabbath to Sunday worship was done by the Apostles."

No it was not. The RCC even admits that they changed the Sabbath to Sunday. It started with Constantine and was made official by the RCC.
An official Catholic reference would be nice, which you will never find. Gibbons has opinions that are not official.
"When Emperor Constantine I—a pagan sun-worshipper—came to power in A.D. 313, he legalized Christianity and made the first Sunday-keeping law. His infamous Sunday enforcement law of March 7, A.D. 321, reads as follows: “On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed.” (Codex Justinianus 3.12.3, trans. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 5th ed. (New York, 1902), 3:380, note 1.)
You can't tell the difference between a law and a Christian practice going back to the Apostles. You don't accept it so you re-write history to make it fit your opinions.
The Sunday law was officially confirmed by the Roman Papacy. The Council of Laodicea in A.D. 364 decreed, “Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honour, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ” (Strand, op. cit., citing Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, 2 [Edinburgh, 1876] 316).


So what. A law reflects what has always been done, just as a teaching always predates scripture.
Cardinal Gibbons, in Faith of Our Fathers, 92nd ed., p. 89, freely admits, “You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we [the Catholic Church] never sanctify.”

Again, “The Catholic Church, … by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday” (The Catholic Mirror, official publication of James Cardinal Gibbons, Sept. 23, 1893).

“Protestants do not realize that by observing Sunday, they accept the authority of the spokesperson of the Church, the Pope” (Our Sunday Visitor, February 5, 1950).

“Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change [Saturday Sabbath to Sunday] was her act... And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical authority in religious things” (H.F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons).

“Sunday is our mark of authority… the church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact” (Catholic Record of London, Ontario Sept 1, 1923)."
Why is this stuff only found in Seventh Day Adventist literature??? If Cardinal Gibbons said that, he's wrong, and the Church is not above the Bible, that is a myth.

Let's go right to the New Testament. The evidence is clear, especially in the Book of Acts, that the day of the Resurrection, namely Sunday, the first day of the week, became the day of the gathering of the Church, in worship and the Holy Eucharist. Those who have remained in full continuity with the Church from apostolic times know this by the constant practice, as well.

You said: "Jesus Christ is the founder of Christianity, not Paul, and not Constantine. "Yeshua" is Aramaic, but you use the term to give yourself a veneer of authenticity. "Kepha" is also Aramaic, so you should avoid using that term because the Aramaic "Kepha" has no constructive pronouns, no petra/petros. Jesus said "You are Kepha and on this Kepha I will build my Church. We know what a rock is. Your usage of the Aramaic is highly selective. Jesus builds his Church on Peter, not on some emperor 300 years later who had no spiritual authority. Myths about Constantine abound."

No, Yeshua is not the founder of Christianity, they were first called Christians at Antioch, that should wave a red flag. I use "Yeshua" because that is his name, not Jesus. What Yeshua was building his church upon was the truth of Peter's revelation that he (Yeshua) was the Son of the Living God. Yeshua was the rock upon whom the church would be built. https://carm.org/is-peter-the-rock

CARM is reputed all over the 'net for its lies about Catholicism. Building a church is the same as founding Christianity. Jesus builds His Church on the personal leadership of Peter, as more Protestant scholars agree that Peter is the rock. St. Ignatius was trained by the Apostle John and the third bishop of Antioch; no doubt you distance yourself from anything he wrote. So your reference to the Christians in Antioch is meaningless.

Jesus is simply a derivative from the Hebrew "Yeshua", I suggest you look it up.


You quoted me" ""they honor Mithra at Christmas and Ashtoreth at Easter" is laughable."
Quote

Your denial is more laughable. You have Google at your fingertips to easily search this out and yet you prefer to cling to your "traditions of men".
I already have researched it, and you have no scholarly evidence to support your pagan influence fallacy that no one has been able to prove. http://www.catholic.com/tracts/is-catholicism-pagan

There are no "tradition of men" in the Catholic Church.
You said: "I would challenge your abuse of scripture line by line, but the post would be 5 miles long. I don't need to discredit you further, you've done that to yourself. You are a product of sola scriptura where anybody can invent bizarre wackiness."

Better for me to be a sheep rather than a goat.
Hostile anti-Catholics are not sheep.



Isaiah 1:13 - God begins to reveal His displeasure with the Sabbath.

Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:2,9; John 20:1,19- the Gospel writers purposely reveal Jesus' resurrection and appearances were on Sunday. This is because Sunday had now become the most important day in the life of the Church.

Acts 20:7 - this text shows the apostolic tradition of gathering together to celebrate the Eucharist on Sunday, the "first day of the week." Luke documents the principle worship was on Sunday because this was one of the departures from the Jewish form of worship.

1 Cor. 16:2 - Paul instructs the Corinthians to make contributions to the churches "on the first day of the week," which is Sunday. This is because the primary day of Christian worship is Sunday.

Col. 2:16-17 - Paul teaches that the Sabbath was only a shadow of what was fulfilled in Christ, and says "let no one pass judgment any more over a Sabbath."

2 Thess. 2:15 - we are to hold fast to apostolic tradition, whether it is oral or written. The 2,000 year-old tradition of the Church is that the apostles changed the Sabbath day of worship from Saturday to Sunday.

Heb. 4:8-9 - regarding the day of rest, if Joshua had given rest, God would not later speak of "another day," which is Sunday, the new Sabbath. Sunday is the first day of the week and the first day of the new creation brought about by our Lord's resurrection, which was on Sunday.

Heb. 7:12 - when there is a change in the priesthood, there is a change in the law as well. Because we have a new Priest and a new sacrifice, we also have a new day of worship, which is Sunday.

Rev 1:10 - John specifically points out that he witnesses the heavenly Eucharistic liturgy on Sunday, the Lord's day, the new day of rest in Christ.

Matt. 16:19; 18:18 - whatever the Church binds on earth is bound in heaven. Since the resurrection, Mass has been principally celebrated on Sunday.



sorry_if.jpg
 

Mungo

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2012
4,332
643
113
England
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Elle said:
Your hopeless!
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

You come up with the craziests posts I have seen for a long time.
You are soundly refuted and then you say kepha is hopeless. :wacko:
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
EXPLODING THE MITHRAS MYTH

In an effort to cast doubt on Christianity, skeptics will attempt to point out parallels between the beliefs and practices of Christians to those of the Roman cult of Mithras. In this article we will examine the most commonly encountered parallels and answer their claims.

exploding the mithras myth <well documented

Refuting Mithras Myth Parallelism To Christianity <well documented

Whatever it meant for ancient pagans, for Christians Easter is the celebration of Christ’s Resurrection. The fact that when it was first celebrated the feast of the Resurrection coincided with pagan celebrations doesn’t mean it was derived from them. The Jewish Passover (on which Christ was crucified) also coincided with such celebrations, yet this didn’t mean it was pagan. According to distorted non-logic, the Passover/seder was pagan because pagans had celebrations on the same day. It's a non-sequitur fallacy.

As for Easter eggs, there’s nothing wrong with painting or hunting them on Easter--provided the real meaning of the day isn’t lost. As with the days of the week (the names of which are of pagan origin), any peculiarly pagan significance attached to Easter eggs was forgotten centuries ago.
 

amadeus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2008
22,491
31,654
113
80
Oklahoma
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
and this is "objective truth" right, lol. Yikes.
Some people really remember the Resurrection every day rather than just once a year.

Easter was one mass my parents at least considered attending when I was growing up. The other one was Christmas. Do you suppose that people who only attend a service commemorating the birth or the resurrection once a year are likely to be saved in the end of the matter? Do you suppose when they last confessed before they died would be a consideration?

[Don't worry about my parents. They finished their course here quite a few years ago in any case.]
 

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,081
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
Do you suppose that people who only attend a service commemorating the birth or the resurrection once a year are likely to be saved in the end of the matter?
ha well at the very least, anyone with hearing was saved from them i guess lol
Do you suppose when they last confessed before they died would be a consideration?
not if they were dead already, i guess. but then i would have to be a witness to this "confession" to see; the fruit of it would be plain imo, on the offended party's face. Either healing would commence, or in the case of an illegitimate confession, not.

So hopefully it becomes apparent that we are discussing two completely diff concepts of "confession;" one being unconfessed sins that are saved up and "confessed" en masse, and the other confession one to another, in real time, leading to healing/salvation.

So "when they last confessed" would imo be vitally important, but we are talking about two different things now, and imo only the last kind of confession removes forgiveness in the only venue where it matters
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: amadeus