As I showed in post #13 the concept goes back to Judaism.
Or do you think Judaism, is based on paganism?
Purgatory True of False
- Thread starter TEXBOW
- Start date
-
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!
Or do you think Judaism, is based on paganism?
The Two Babylons has been thoroughly debunked. But Catholics haters just cannot bear to let it go.
there are two major problems with his thesis:
Firstly his claims turned out to be bogus. He simply invented information about Babylonia which doesn’t exist. Likewise his diagrams and sketches were just a product of his imagination,
Secondly he made links without any causal evidence, avoiding more realistic causal links. For example he claimed that the Babylonians offered round wafers to their God, the same a Catholic hosts at the Catholic Mass. His Babylonian claim was false, he showed no link as to how the Catholic Church took this from Babylon, and ignored the obvious point that the Matzo bread which Jesus broke at the last supper was flat round unleavened bread. Also manna is described as round (Ex 16:14) and like wafers (Ex16:31)
As Wikipedia says: "tribute to historical inaccuracy and know-nothing religious bigotry" with "shoddy scholarship, blatant dishonesty" and a "nonsensical thesis".[3][4]
The Two Babylons - Wikipedia
The two bits in quotation marks are referenced in footnotes [3][4] in Wikipedia as from
[3] Book Review: Plan 9 From Saturday Christian Book Reviews November 12th, 2005
[4] Book Review: Honesty is the Best Policy Christian Book Reviews November 12th, 2005
Hislop’s claims were extensively investigated by Ralph Woodrow, an evangelical minister who completely destroyed Hislop’s claims in his book The Babylon Connection?
The reviewer of Woodrow's The Babylon Connection? says:
The Babylon Connection? is a devastating critique of Hislop and his many imitators. Almost from the first page, the shoddy scholarship, blatant dishonesty, and personal prejudices of Alexander Hislop are quite evident. By the end of the first chapter, none except those suffering from “black helicopters over America” paranoia could possibly view Hislop as anything but a crackpot and a fraud. Woodrow presses on, however, and in painstaking detail demonstrates Hislop’s lack of scholarly integrity. As one who was formerly believed Hislop to be a credible source, Woodrow understands the mindset of those fooled by this belief system and he leaves their delusions in tatters. When it is over, nothing of Hislop’s rhetorical edifice is left standing.
(Mythicist Milwaukee)
Despite this extensive debunking of Hislop’s claims you will find them rampant among anti-Catholic web sites, which feed off each other. Gullible Christians still assume they are true and the Catholic Church is a pagan version of Babylonian religion.
Only if you imagine it. Let's take one example from Hislop:
'The Roman Church maintains that it was not so much the seed of the woman, as the woman herself, that was to bruise the head of the serpent. In defiance of all grammar, she renders the Divine denunciation against the serpent thus: "She shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise her heel."'
When we go to the Douay-Rheims/Latin Vulgate Bible it matches what Hislop said: 15 inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem et semen tuum et semen illius ipsa conteret caput tuum et tu insidiaberis calcaneo eius
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.
But that is a perversion of Scripture which reads in every translation just as the KJB: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it [He] shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
This is speaking about the Lord Jesus Christ, not "the woman". So why did the Catholic Church pervert and corrupt this Scripture? Hislop has the explanation.
"Instead, therefore, of the Babylonian goddess being cast out, in too many cases her name only was changed. She was called the Virgin Mary, and, with her child, was worshipped with the same idolatrous feeling by professing Christians, as formerly by open and avowed Pagans... This, however, is just the exact reproduction of the doctrine of ancient Babylon in regard to the great goddess-mother. The Madonna of Rome, then, is just the Madonna of Babylon. The "Queen of Heaven" in the one system is the same as the "Queen of Heaven" in the other. The goddess worshipped in Babylon and Egypt as the Tabernacle or Habitation of God, is identical with her who, under the name of Mary, is called by Rome "The HOUSE consecrated to God," "the awful Dwellingplace," * "the Mansion of God" (Pancarpium Marioe), the "Tabernacle of the Holy Ghost" (Garden of the Soul), the "Temple of the Trinity" (Golden Manual in Scottish Protestant).
The worship of Mary as the Queen of Heaven is entrenched in Catholicism. So how can you say Hislop has been "debunked"?
If we are still doing anything that is displeasing to God in our day to day lives, then is not further purging needed? Should not that purging be occurring right now as we are growing closer to God? If it is not, what will become of us? Perhaps we need to be touched again and then again... until all the garbage and sinful way are purged from us?
Mr 8:23 And he took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and put his hands upon him, he asked him if he saw ought.
"And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking.
After that he put his hands again upon his eyes, and made him look up: and he was restored, and saw every man clearly." Mark 8:24-25
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.
I think the best you can claim is that this is a poorly worded translation.
But I came across this as an explanation:
[15] "She shall crush": Ipsa, the woman; so divers of the fathers read this place, conformably to the Latin: others read it ipsum, viz., the seed. The sense is the same: for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent's head.
Moreover the Wycliffe translation does it similarly:
I shall set enmities betwixt thee and the woman, and betwixt thy seed and her seed; she shall break thine head, and thou shalt set ambushes to her heel. (I shall put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; her seed shall break thy head, and thou shalt set ambush to her seed’s heel.)
That's just Hislop rant without any evidence to back it up.
You ought to read Woodrow's book. He exposes how unscholarly and dishonest Hislop is.
Woodrow originally produced a book based largely on Hislop's called Babylon Mystery Religion, which sold widely and was translated into several languages. He says that few challenged his book. One who did was Scott Klemm, a high school history teacher in Southern California. Woodrow writes:
“Being a Christian and appreciating other things I had written, he began to show me evidence that Hislop was not a reliable historian. As a result I realised that I needed to go though Hislop's work, my basic source, and prayerfully check it out.
As I did this it became clear – Hislop's “history” was often only mythology. Even though some myths may sometimes reflect events that actually happened, an arbitrary piecing together of ancient myths cannot provide a sound basis for history.”
Woodrow went on the investigate Hislop's claims consulting many reliable sources. He wrote another book called The Babylonian Connection? in which he demolished Hislop's claims.
Woodrow says:
Here is a list of the some of the unsubstantiated claims that are made about the religion of ancient Babylon:
• The Babylonians went to a confessional and confessed sins to priests who wore black clergy garments.
• Their king, Nimrod, was born on December 25. Round decorations on Christmas trees and round communion wafers honoured him as the Sun-god.
• Sun-worshippers went to their temples weekly, on Sunday, to worship the Sun-god.
• Nimrod’s wife was Semiramis, who claimed to be the Virgin Queen of Heaven, and was the mother of Tammuz.
• Tammuz was killed by a wild boar when he was age 40; so 40 days of Lent were set aside to honour his death.
• The Babylonians wept for him on “Good Friday.” They worshipped a cross-the initial letter of his name.
It is amazing how unsubstantiated teachings like these circulate—and are believed. One can go to any library, check any history book about ancient Babylon, none of these things will be found. They are not historically accurate, but are based on an arbitrary piecing together of bits and pieces of mythology.
http://www.ralphwoodrow.org/books/pa...n-mystery.html
I ask that you please understand me. I do not hate Catholics. I'm guessing no true believer does. I do hate false doctrine. I see the Catholic Church as a large target for evangelism. For me it's like knowing that a building is about to explode and kill its occupants and it's imperative that I warn them to get out. I love you, God loves you, I rebuke the Catholics false teachings. It's that simple.
Oh sure.
I've heard it all before.
Make poisonous & false claims about Catholics & the Catholic Church and then make hypocritical claims about loving Catholics.
amigo de christo
Well-Known Member
I hear you loud and clear my friend . That is why i warn as well . It is why i warn most all of even the sold out protestant churches too .
I dont pick and choose my denomination to rebuke . If one is in error it gets rebuked for the sake of the souls IN IT .
WE must only increase in our reminders my friend . Never let one soul try and make you feel guilty for your correction .
We correct out of love . Even paul corrected big time and sharply out of love .
And though the more he abundantely he loved the less he was loved . Have we become their enemies because we tell them the truth .
Paul once wrote that too . Have i become your enemy because i tell you the truth . It was in galations .
You mount up and increase the warnings . WE desire no soul to perish , so warn them all to come out of that system
and out of any other church that would teach falsehoods as well .
amigo de christo
Well-Known Member
It is you who falsely accuse . That man is trying to help you all , just as i have been .
Sure i can be grave and sharp at times , but it dont mean i dont love folks . I am pleading with you to come out of that place .
We can all just start fresh in the bible and learn Christ for ourselves . HURRY , DO not wait , just come OUT
and start afresh .
Pythagorean12
Active Member
Yes, it is.
STAR OF DAVID OR STAR OF REMPHAN? – Scripture Truth Ministries
the hexagram—the Star of Rempham
“But you carried a Tabernacle for your Moloch, and the image of your idols, the star of your god, which you made to yourselves.” Amos 5:26
“And you took unto you the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Rempham, figures which you made to adore them. And I will carry you away beyond Babylon.”
Acts 7:43
Yes, it is.
STAR OF DAVID OR STAR OF REMPHAN? – Scripture Truth Ministries
the hexagram—the Star of Rempham
“But you carried a Tabernacle for your Moloch, and the image of your idols, the star of your god, which you made to yourselves.” Amos 5:26
“And you took unto you the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Rempham, figures which you made to adore them. And I will carry you away beyond Babylon.”
Acts 7:43
So Judaism was a pagan religion and Jesus was a pagan.
Thanks, I never knew that.
Pythagorean12
Active Member
Education makes sarcasm unnecessary.
You must have ignored the thread addressing the pagan origin of Easter and Christmas.
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
.
It would be interesting to know how many Catholics arrive in Hell every day
thinking at first they've arrived in Purgatory. Can you just imagine their
disappointment?
And then the socialists show up mocking and teasing; requesting the
Catholics something like this: Hello Christians! How's about you give us a
message from The Church ay? Tell us about the love of God and the
communion of saints. Awwww-Haw-Haw-Haw-Haw-Hawwwww!
_
It would be interesting to know how many Catholics arrive in Hell every day
thinking at first they've arrived in Purgatory. Can you just imagine their
disappointment?
And then the socialists show up mocking and teasing; requesting the
Catholics something like this: Hello Christians! How's about you give us a
message from The Church ay? Tell us about the love of God and the
communion of saints. Awwww-Haw-Haw-Haw-Haw-Hawwwww!
_
Last edited:
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
.
Quite a few of Rome's doctrines are built upon what's called allusions;
defined by Websters as a statement that refers to something without
mentioning it directly.
For example, the doctrine of purgatory is based upon passages in the Bible
that don't really speak of it clearly, conclusively, and without ambiguity so
Rome has gathered together passages that-- while they don't actually speak
of a purgatory --they suggest its existence; like the one below:
• 1Cor 3:9-15 . .We are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's
building. According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise
master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it. But let
each man be careful how he builds upon it. For no man can lay a foundation
other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
. . . Now if any man builds upon the foundation with gold, silver, precious
stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day
will show it, because it is to be revealed with fire; and the fire itself will test
the quality of each man's work. If any man's work which he has built upon it
remains, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work is burned up, he shall
suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as through fire.
That passage is sometimes appropriated by Catholics to defend the doctrine
of Purgatory. However, a note in the current official Catholic Bible-- the 2011
New American Bible -says:
"The text of 1Cor 3:15 has sometimes been used to support the notion of a
purgatory, though it does not envisage this."
If perchance there are Catholics reading this, I should clue them that the
non Biblical materials (foot notes) in the 2011 New American Bible have a
nihil obstat by Reverend Richard L.Schaefer, Censor Deputatus, and an
imprimatur by Most Reverend Jerome Hanus, O.S.B. Archbishop of Duguque.
Nihil Obstat is defined as: The certification by an official censor of the Roman
Catholic Church that a book has been examined and found to contain
nothing opposed to faith and morals.
Imprimatur is defined as: Approval of a publication under circumstances of
official censorship.
_
Quite a few of Rome's doctrines are built upon what's called allusions;
defined by Websters as a statement that refers to something without
mentioning it directly.
For example, the doctrine of purgatory is based upon passages in the Bible
that don't really speak of it clearly, conclusively, and without ambiguity so
Rome has gathered together passages that-- while they don't actually speak
of a purgatory --they suggest its existence; like the one below:
• 1Cor 3:9-15 . .We are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's
building. According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise
master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it. But let
each man be careful how he builds upon it. For no man can lay a foundation
other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
. . . Now if any man builds upon the foundation with gold, silver, precious
stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day
will show it, because it is to be revealed with fire; and the fire itself will test
the quality of each man's work. If any man's work which he has built upon it
remains, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work is burned up, he shall
suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as through fire.
That passage is sometimes appropriated by Catholics to defend the doctrine
of Purgatory. However, a note in the current official Catholic Bible-- the 2011
New American Bible -says:
"The text of 1Cor 3:15 has sometimes been used to support the notion of a
purgatory, though it does not envisage this."
If perchance there are Catholics reading this, I should clue them that the
non Biblical materials (foot notes) in the 2011 New American Bible have a
nihil obstat by Reverend Richard L.Schaefer, Censor Deputatus, and an
imprimatur by Most Reverend Jerome Hanus, O.S.B. Archbishop of Duguque.
Nihil Obstat is defined as: The certification by an official censor of the Roman
Catholic Church that a book has been examined and found to contain
nothing opposed to faith and morals.
Imprimatur is defined as: Approval of a publication under circumstances of
official censorship.
_
Like Incarnation and Trinity the actual word is not in the Bible but the concept is.
In my NAB it says:
The Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur are official declarations that a book or pamphlet is free of doctrinal or moral error. No implication is contained therein that those who have granted the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur agree with the content, opinions or statements expressed. (my emboldening)
Therefore the footnote is an opinion of the authors and not official Church teaching.
Note: Although we talk about Purgatory as though it were a place, the Catholic Church defines it as a process.
“The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.” (CCC 1031)
“The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.” (CCC 1031)
If it is @Mungo it has never been taught in any of the churches I have been part of.
Similar threads
