Boycott the Pope's Visit to USA

[Book of Jeremiah]

Is that a bad thing to you Jeremiah, observing the 7th day?

When I was a teen working in retail, in my State, all retail was closed on Sundays....then when they finally passed a law to open 5 hours on Sunday, they had to pay us employees having to work Sundays, time and a half...for the 5 hours....

once Sundays were A-ok for people to work, it eventually became 24 hours being opened if a store wished and ALL HOLIDAYS now, retail employees have to work....

that's life in the world of Mamon, I guess....

No, I rest on Sunday and do not work. But I'm not under the law. If I need to go to the store and buy some groceries I go to the store. This Pope wants to shut the world down on Sunday and force everyone to observe Sunday whether they want to or not. Do you think that is fair? I don't. Jesus Christ never forced his will upon anyone. This man is a power hungry wolf who is already showing his true colors if you will pay attention to what he is up to. People had better wake up!

He is trying to force his Sunday Law on Israel! They are Jews and observe Saturday as their Sabbath! He has some nerve! Where's Rosie? She'll tell you. The man has no right to dictate to the world what they must do on Sunday - he has no right to enforce ANY LAWS. He's acting as a Dictator from behind the scenes. Just wait until he comes out with it all the way.

 

[Care4all]

Is that a bad thing to you Jeremiah, observing the 7th day?

When I was a teen working in retail, in my State, all retail was closed on Sundays....then when they finally passed a law to open 5 hours on Sunday, they had to pay us employees having to work Sundays, time and a half...for the 5 hours....

once Sundays were A-ok for people to work, it eventually became 24 hours being opened if a store wished and ALL HOLIDAYS now, retail employees have to work....

that's life in the world of Mamon, I guess....

No, I rest on Sunday and do not work. But I'm not under the law. If I need to go to the store and buy some groceries I go to the store. This Pope wants to shut the world down on Sunday and force everyone to observe Sunday whether they want to or not. Do you think that is fair? I don't. Jesus Christ never forced his will upon anyone. This man is a power hungry wolf who is already showing his true colors if you will pay attention to what he is up to. People had better wake up!

He is trying to force his Sunday Law on Israel! They are Jews and observe Saturday as their Sabbath! He has some nerve! Where's Rosie? She'll tell you. The man has no right to dictate to the world what they must do on Sunday - he has no right to enforce ANY LAWS. He's acting as a Dictator from behind the scenes. Just wait until he comes out with it all the way.

Jeremiah, may I be honest with you? I think you are off your rocker on this and your obsession with the Pope.

He can't force anyone to do this....if they agree and do it, it is of their own free will....the Pope controls nothing but the Vatican...Italy is it's own country....

he can request all he wants, he does not rule though...the Italians rule their own country, with their own government.

 

[ninja007]

.
oh really,

much the same as Benedict Arnold ?


* I wonder if the person makes a difference to the Jeri crowd ?

.

Was Benedict Arnold accused of being a paedophile like Ratzinger and Pope Francis have been,Breezewood? I never heard that before.

I do know there was a warrant for the arrest of Jorge Mario Bergoglio aka Pope Francis for the rape of two little girls. They are grown now and gave testimony that he raped them as children and that he was present at a black mass where child sacrifice took place. Am I surprised? Not at all. He has one of the most evil countenances I have ever seen on a human being. Very dark individual. p.s. Pope Francis's Nuncio was also charged with serial child molestation of many, many homeless boys - his assistant gave a written confession to the police and when it became apparent the Nuncio would be arrested and put on trial Pope Francis immediately whisked him away back to the Vatican where he told the nation who wanted the Nuncio back to face trial - they would hold the Nuncio under house arrest. They didn't keep their word. They lied. The Paedophile Nuncio was found walking the streets of Rome freely without any supervision. The Paedophile Pope and his Paedophile Nuncio continue to get away with crimes against children and the world wants to give them a Parade down Mainstreet NYC. Go figure.

Jeremiah-----you got a reliable source-------it sounds horrific. I am avoiding
Manhattan----------he gives me the creeps-------but that is just a kind of superficial
impression

Yes. I'll get it. Hold on.

Here is one news article about it, Rosie. I have some videos I can post too with testimonies of people - the Vatican is the most powerful, richest organization on earth and have managed to prevent his arrest but he was found guilty of these crimes. Victims do not lie about such things. There were 48 witnesses. That is more than Bill Cosby but Bill Cosby doesn't have the wealth the Roman Catholic Church & Vatican have either.

Pope Francis Found Guilty Of Child Trafficking, Rape, Murder | Celebrities

Yesterday defendants Pope Francis Bergoglio, Catholic Jesuit Superior General Adolfo Pachon and Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby were found guilty of rape, torture, murder and trafficking of children. Five judges of the International Common Law Court of Justice in Brussels determined that the crimes occurred as recently as 2010. Since last March over 48 eyewitnesses have come forward to testify before this ICLCJ Court about the defendants’ activities as members of the Ninth Circle Satanic Child Sacrifice Cult.

The Ninth Circle Satanic Cult was said to do child sacrifices at Roman Catholic cathedrals in Montreal, New York, Rome, Scotland, London, Carnarvon Castle in Wales, an undisclosed French Chateau in Holland and at Canadian Catholic and Anglican Indian residential schools in Kamloops, British Columbia and Brantford, Ontario Canada. The Ninth Circle Satanic Child Sacrifice Cult was believed to use privately owned forest groves in the US, Canada, France and Holland for their “Human Hunting Parties” for global elites including members of European royal families. Teens were said to be obtained by the mafia, then stripped naked, raped, hunted down and killed. The Chief Prosecutor stated. “The Catholic Church is the world’s largest corporation and appears to be in collusion with the mafia, governments, police and courts worldwide.”

Two adolescent women told the ICLCJ Court that Pope Francis raped them while participating in child sacrifices. Eight other eyewitnesses confirmed their allegations of being witness to rape and child sacrifices. The Ninth Circle Satanic Cult were said to take place during the Springs of 2009 and 2010 in rural Holland and Belgium.

Your church is probably filled with child molesters.......they just like to keep it on the down low.

we allow our pastors to marry so they dont feel the urge to rape kids.

 

[irosie91]

Is that a bad thing to you Jeremiah, observing the 7th day?

When I was a teen working in retail, in my State, all retail was closed on Sundays....then when they finally passed a law to open 5 hours on Sunday, they had to pay us employees having to work Sundays, time and a half...for the 5 hours....

once Sundays were A-ok for people to work, it eventually became 24 hours being opened if a store wished and ALL HOLIDAYS now, retail employees have to work....

that's life in the world of Mamon, I guess....

No, I rest on Sunday and do not work. But I'm not under the law. If I need to go to the store and buy some groceries I go to the store. This Pope wants to shut the world down on Sunday and force everyone to observe Sunday whether they want to or not. Do you think that is fair? I don't. Jesus Christ never forced his will upon anyone. This man is a power hungry wolf who is already showing his true colors if you will pay attention to what he is up to. People had better wake up!

He is trying to force his Sunday Law on Israel! They are Jews and observe Saturday as their Sabbath! He has some nerve! Where's Rosie? She'll tell you. The man has no right to dictate to the world what they must do on Sunday - he has no right to enforce ANY LAWS. He's acting as a Dictator from behind the scenes. Just wait until he comes out with it all the way.

Jeremiah, may I be honest with you? I think you are off your rocker on this and your obsession with the Pope.

He can't force anyone to do this....if they agree and do it, it is of their own free will....the Pope controls nothing but the Vatican...Italy is it's own country....

he can request all he wants, he does not rule though...the Italians rule their own country, with their own government.

the pope has a huge influence on hundreds of millions of people

 

[irosie91]

Is that a bad thing to you Jeremiah, observing the 7th day?

When I was a teen working in retail, in my State, all retail was closed on Sundays....then when they finally passed a law to open 5 hours on Sunday, they had to pay us employees having to work Sundays, time and a half...for the 5 hours....

once Sundays were A-ok for people to work, it eventually became 24 hours being opened if a store wished and ALL HOLIDAYS now, retail employees have to work....

that's life in the world of Mamon, I guess....

No, I rest on Sunday and do not work. But I'm not under the law. If I need to go to the store and buy some groceries I go to the store. This Pope wants to shut the world down on Sunday and force everyone to observe Sunday whether they want to or not. Do you think that is fair? I don't. Jesus Christ never forced his will upon anyone. This man is a power hungry wolf who is already showing his true colors if you will pay attention to what he is up to. People had better wake up!

He is trying to force his Sunday Law on Israel! They are Jews and observe Saturday as their Sabbath! He has some nerve! Where's Rosie? She'll tell you. The man has no right to dictate to the world what they must do on Sunday - he has no right to enforce ANY LAWS. He's acting as a Dictator from behind the scenes. Just wait until he comes out with it all the way.

Jeremiah-----you got a link? the pope is trying to impose sunday as an
enforced Sabbath for the whole world?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Was Benedict Arnold accused of being a paedophile like Ratzinger and Pope Francis have been,Breezewood? I never heard that before.

I do know there was a warrant for the arrest of Jorge Mario Bergoglio aka Pope Francis for the rape of two little girls. They are grown now and gave testimony that he raped them as children and that he was present at a black mass where child sacrifice took place. Am I surprised? Not at all. He has one of the most evil countenances I have ever seen on a human being. Very dark individual. p.s. Pope Francis's Nuncio was also charged with serial child molestation of many, many homeless boys - his assistant gave a written confession to the police and when it became apparent the Nuncio would be arrested and put on trial Pope Francis immediately whisked him away back to the Vatican where he told the nation who wanted the Nuncio back to face trial - they would hold the Nuncio under house arrest. They didn't keep their word. They lied. The Paedophile Nuncio was found walking the streets of Rome freely without any supervision. The Paedophile Pope and his Paedophile Nuncio continue to get away with crimes against children and the world wants to give them a Parade down Mainstreet NYC. Go figure.

Jeremiah-----you got a reliable source-------it sounds horrific. I am avoiding
Manhattan----------he gives me the creeps-------but that is just a kind of superficial
impression

Yes. I'll get it. Hold on.

Here is one news article about it, Rosie. I have some videos I can post too with testimonies of people - the Vatican is the most powerful, richest organization on earth and have managed to prevent his arrest but he was found guilty of these crimes. Victims do not lie about such things. There were 48 witnesses. That is more than Bill Cosby but Bill Cosby doesn't have the wealth the Roman Catholic Church & Vatican have either.

Pope Francis Found Guilty Of Child Trafficking, Rape, Murder | Celebrities

Yesterday defendants Pope Francis Bergoglio, Catholic Jesuit Superior General Adolfo Pachon and Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby were found guilty of rape, torture, murder and trafficking of children. Five judges of the International Common Law Court of Justice in Brussels determined that the crimes occurred as recently as 2010. Since last March over 48 eyewitnesses have come forward to testify before this ICLCJ Court about the defendants’ activities as members of the Ninth Circle Satanic Child Sacrifice Cult.

The Ninth Circle Satanic Cult was said to do child sacrifices at Roman Catholic cathedrals in Montreal, New York, Rome, Scotland, London, Carnarvon Castle in Wales, an undisclosed French Chateau in Holland and at Canadian Catholic and Anglican Indian residential schools in Kamloops, British Columbia and Brantford, Ontario Canada. The Ninth Circle Satanic Child Sacrifice Cult was believed to use privately owned forest groves in the US, Canada, France and Holland for their “Human Hunting Parties” for global elites including members of European royal families. Teens were said to be obtained by the mafia, then stripped naked, raped, hunted down and killed. The Chief Prosecutor stated. “The Catholic Church is the world’s largest corporation and appears to be in collusion with the mafia, governments, police and courts worldwide.”

Two adolescent women told the ICLCJ Court that Pope Francis raped them while participating in child sacrifices. Eight other eyewitnesses confirmed their allegations of being witness to rape and child sacrifices. The Ninth Circle Satanic Cult were said to take place during the Springs of 2009 and 2010 in rural Holland and Belgium.

Your church is probably filled with child molesters.......they just like to keep it on the down low.

we allow our pastors to marry so they dont feel the urge to rape kids.

The KJV Bible is very clear that marriage is not to be forbidden and that those who forbid others to marry, forbid others to abstain from meat are teaching false doctrine and are not part of the body of Christ. The Apostle Peter was a married man. Jesus healed his mother in law of a fever.

It is written:
And when Jesus was come into Peter's house, he saw his wife's mother laid, and sick of a fever.
Matthew 8:14


Peter didn't abstain from meat on "Good Friday." Jesus never told Peter to divorce his wife nor did he tell his other disciples they could not be married. The teachings of Roman Catholicism have no biblical explanation which is why the Bible calls their teachings - "Doctrines of Devils". There is no biblical evidence in Scripture that Peter ever visited Rome. NONE. Considering the Catholic Doctrine insists that Peter was appointed head of the church in Rome don't you find it strange that in Paul's letter to the Romans he greets everyone but Peter? Peter's name he does not mention even once! Why? He wasn't there. If Peter had been the leader of the church in Rome he would have addressed Peter first and called him as such. Paul never did. Paul was the one called to preach to the Romans. Not Peter. Peter wasn't called to preach to the Gentiles, Peter was called by Jesus Christ to preach to the Jews. When the false Catholic System was set up - they didn't search out the facts very well before setting up their false teachings. It's obvious they didn't know the Scriptures. So how is it possible they wrote them? Answer? They didn't. The Scriptures were recorded by the early Church. Not the Catholics.

More evidence - it is reported Peter's Tomb was found in Israel not too far ago. Once again the lies of the Vatican were exposed - they claimed to have Peter's body at the Vatican. Another Vatican myth exposed. The entire religion is built on a lie. Millions are perishing and going to hell for following this false religion. Pray for the Roman Catholic people that they will flee from Catholicism and call on Jesus Christ to save them.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Is that a bad thing to you Jeremiah, observing the 7th day?

When I was a teen working in retail, in my State, all retail was closed on Sundays....then when they finally passed a law to open 5 hours on Sunday, they had to pay us employees having to work Sundays, time and a half...for the 5 hours....

once Sundays were A-ok for people to work, it eventually became 24 hours being opened if a store wished and ALL HOLIDAYS now, retail employees have to work....

that's life in the world of Mamon, I guess....

No, I rest on Sunday and do not work. But I'm not under the law. If I need to go to the store and buy some groceries I go to the store. This Pope wants to shut the world down on Sunday and force everyone to observe Sunday whether they want to or not. Do you think that is fair? I don't. Jesus Christ never forced his will upon anyone. This man is a power hungry wolf who is already showing his true colors if you will pay attention to what he is up to. People had better wake up!

He is trying to force his Sunday Law on Israel! They are Jews and observe Saturday as their Sabbath! He has some nerve! Where's Rosie? She'll tell you. The man has no right to dictate to the world what they must do on Sunday - he has no right to enforce ANY LAWS. He's acting as a Dictator from behind the scenes. Just wait until he comes out with it all the way.

Jeremiah, may I be honest with you? I think you are off your rocker on this and your obsession with the Pope.

He can't force anyone to do this....if they agree and do it, it is of their own free will....the Pope controls nothing but the Vatican...Italy is it's own country....

he can request all he wants, he does not rule though...the Italians rule their own country, with their own government.

I believe you are seriously deceived individual, Care4all, but I won't lower my standards to meet yours in falsely accusing you of insanity. I believe morally you are sick but mentally you know what you are doing. Which is why you are going to be held accountable before God for pretending this Pope is harmless and that the Vatican does not have plans to rule a One World false religion in the NWO. Is it worth your soul going to hell over? Defending this anti-Christ system? Accusing good of being evil and defending evil as if it were good? You had better think very hard about that. Or you will find yourself in hell on a day you least expect it. Satan does not give any forewarning and your open season playing on his ground with your lies and wicked behavior. You have falsely accused me. I have no obsession with the Pope - I have a passion to defend the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and warn the people to stay away from this wolf in sheep's clothing and have nothing to do with Catholicism. If they are in it, they need to leave.

The ex-Jesuits who are now Christian have come out to warn the people in America of Rome's intention. The Sunday Law they intend to have as "International Law" is only the tip of the iceberg. The world hasn't seen anything yet.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Is that a bad thing to you Jeremiah, observing the 7th day?

When I was a teen working in retail, in my State, all retail was closed on Sundays....then when they finally passed a law to open 5 hours on Sunday, they had to pay us employees having to work Sundays, time and a half...for the 5 hours....

once Sundays were A-ok for people to work, it eventually became 24 hours being opened if a store wished and ALL HOLIDAYS now, retail employees have to work....

that's life in the world of Mamon, I guess....

No, I rest on Sunday and do not work. But I'm not under the law. If I need to go to the store and buy some groceries I go to the store. This Pope wants to shut the world down on Sunday and force everyone to observe Sunday whether they want to or not. Do you think that is fair? I don't. Jesus Christ never forced his will upon anyone. This man is a power hungry wolf who is already showing his true colors if you will pay attention to what he is up to. People had better wake up!

He is trying to force his Sunday Law on Israel! They are Jews and observe Saturday as their Sabbath! He has some nerve! Where's Rosie? She'll tell you. The man has no right to dictate to the world what they must do on Sunday - he has no right to enforce ANY LAWS. He's acting as a Dictator from behind the scenes. Just wait until he comes out with it all the way.

Jeremiah, may I be honest with you? I think you are off your rocker on this and your obsession with the Pope.

He can't force anyone to do this....if they agree and do it, it is of their own free will....the Pope controls nothing but the Vatican...Italy is it's own country....

he can request all he wants, he does not rule though...the Italians rule their own country, with their own government.

the pope has a huge influence on hundreds of millions of people

Which is what makes him so dangerous, Rosie. It is not as much influence as they are using mind control. The discussion about mind control was mentioned on SBN Frances and Friends concerning what the Roman Vatican is involved in and how deceitful they are in their methods. There was a Christian on their discussion panel who said he met with a Military person who told him that within 3 days he could use certain methods to control his mind that he would be completely brainwashed and submitting to him. Within 3 days. That is why the people of the world should not listen to this Pope, they should not have anything to do with him. He is a very evil man and the history of Catholicism has already taught us they are capable of anything including mass murder. They murdered 58 million people over a period of 605 years of Inquisitions. This is a very bloody religion that cannot be trusted. I count it more dangerous than Islam and that is saying something.

 

[Votto]

View attachment 50817

Blessed are the carbon emission fighters and non-tooters, for they will inherit the earth.

Now where is my Popemobile with bullet proof glass? I wish to wave at the crowds.

Is that the gindaloon version of the jebus?

Only you would ask such a question.

Just the mere fact that it troubles you puts a smile on my face.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

This is Rabbi Steven Ben-Denoon giving a report from Israel on what he suspects this Pope is planning and also a report on his trip to the USA. I find this Rabbi to be very well informed on what is happening concerning the Vatican and this Pope. May God bless this Rabbi for warning people!



Published on Aug 16, 2015
September is almost upon us and I have wondered if this is really the beginning of the New World Order or is this going to be the NWCO New World Catholic Order. Pope Francis is calling for One World Religion, One World Government, and One World Monetary System. Well in many Non Canonized books he is prophesied of in detail by Yahshua (Jesus) this may be why the Vatican refused these books addmition to the Cannon

 

[Liminal]

Is that a bad thing to you Jeremiah, observing the 7th day?

When I was a teen working in retail, in my State, all retail was closed on Sundays....then when they finally passed a law to open 5 hours on Sunday, they had to pay us employees having to work Sundays, time and a half...for the 5 hours....

once Sundays were A-ok for people to work, it eventually became 24 hours being opened if a store wished and ALL HOLIDAYS now, retail employees have to work....

that's life in the world of Mamon, I guess....

No, I rest on Sunday and do not work. But I'm not under the law. If I need to go to the store and buy some groceries I go to the store. This Pope wants to shut the world down on Sunday and force everyone to observe Sunday whether they want to or not. Do you think that is fair? I don't. Jesus Christ never forced his will upon anyone. This man is a power hungry wolf who is already showing his true colors if you will pay attention to what he is up to. People had better wake up!

He is trying to force his Sunday Law on Israel! They are Jews and observe Saturday as their Sabbath! He has some nerve! Where's Rosie? She'll tell you. The man has no right to dictate to the world what they must do on Sunday - he has no right to enforce ANY LAWS. He's acting as a Dictator from behind the scenes. Just wait until he comes out with it all the way.

Jeremiah, may I be honest with you? I think you are off your rocker on this and your obsession with the Pope.

He can't force anyone to do this....if they agree and do it, it is of their own free will....the Pope controls nothing but the Vatican...Italy is it's own country....

he can request all he wants, he does not rule though...the Italians rule their own country, with their own government.

the pope has a huge influence on hundreds of millions of people

Which is what makes him so dangerous, Rosie. It is not as much influence as they are using mind control. The discussion about mind control was mentioned on SBN Frances and Friends concerning what the Roman Vatican is involved in and how deceitful they are in their methods. There was a Christian on their discussion panel who said he met with a Military person who told him that within 3 days he could use certain methods to control his mind that he would be completely brainwashed and submitting to him. Within 3 days. That is why the people of the world should not listen to this Pope, they should not have anything to do with him. He is a very evil man and the history of Catholicism has already taught us they are capable of anything including mass murder. They murdered 58 million people over a period of 605 years of Inquisitions. This is a very bloody religion that cannot be trusted. I count it more dangerous than Islam and that is saying something.

The reason fundamentalist types can't stand the Pope is because he carries real moral authority, his message crosses all kinds of lines, cultural, political, economic and religious. The Pope's primary messages of Christianity are one's of caring for the people who need help most, the poor, the sick, homeless, ordinary working people struggling to survive, victims of war and oppression. Unlike your superficial philosophy, the Pope's message is one of inclusion, not exclusion. He's more concerned about how we live our live's here on earth than what we say we believe.......because that's how you get to heaven. The Pope is concerned about the state of humanity now, while fundamentalists are preoccupied with rapture dogma and armageddon.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Massive list of Roman Catholic False doctrines

We can begin here -


Mary had many other children in addition to Jesus

Because these verses so clearly contradict Catholic doctrine, Catholic interpreters will insist these are cousins, kinsmen, or from a supposed earlier marriage of Joseph. Of course, the Bible proves all these things wrong. The Catechism gives this ridiculous and incorrect explanation:

• "The Church has always understood these passages as not referring to other children of the Virgin Mary. In fact James and Joseph, 'brothers of Jesus,' are the sons of another Mary, a disciple of Christ..." Pg. 126 #500).

Matthew 13:55-56 & Mark 6:3

Cannot simply be cousins because Colossians 4:10 uses a separate Greek word. John 1:41 uses the same term of Peter and his brother.

The Catholic Catechism says of these verses: "The Church has always understood these passages as not referring to other children of the Virgin Mary. In fact James and Joseph, 'brothers of Jesus,' are the sons of another Mary, a disciple of Christ..." Pg. 126 #500).

The Catholic church teaches that the Mary in these passages is the mother of Jesus, but Jesus brothers and sisters are children of another woman also named Mary. The children are so clearly the offspring of the "Mary" of this passage, that the Pope has come to the conclusion is must be a different Mary! Incredible!

Now read it for yourself from the scripture and see if you agree with the Catholic church that the Mary of these passages is both the mother of Jesus and the mother of James and Joseph and Simon and Judas.

• Matthew 13:55-56"Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? 56 "And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?" 57 And they took offense at Him. But Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his home town, and in his own household."
• Mark 6:3 "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon? Are not His sisters here with us?" And they took offense at Him. 4 And Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his home town and among his own relatives and in his own household."

Are you still Roman Catholic after reading that?

Matthew 12:46 & Mk 3:31 & Lk 8:19

Jesus is distinguishing between blood brothers versus brothers of faith. Remember it was someone else who called them "mother and brothers" not Jesus. If the brothers are not literal, then neither is the mother. Cannot simply be cousins because Colossians 4:10 uses a separate Greek word. John 1:41 uses the same term of Peter and his brother.

• Mt 12:46 While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. 47 And someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You." 48 But He answered the one who was telling Him and said, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?" 49 And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, "Behold, My mother and My brothers! 50 "For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother."
• Mk 3:31And His mother and His brothers *arrived, and standing outside they sent word to Him, and called Him. 32 And a multitude was sitting around Him, and they *said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are outside looking for You." 33 And answering them, He *said,"Who are My mother and My brothers?" 34 And looking about on those who were sitting around Him, He *said, "Behold, My mother and My brothers! 35 "For whoever does the will of God, he is My brother and sister and mother."
• Lk 8:19And His mother and brothers came to Him, and they were unable to get to Him because of the crowd. 20 And it was reported to Him, "Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wishing to see You." 21 But He answered and said to them, "My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it."

Matthew 1:23-25

As clear as if it said, "kept a virgin until wedding day."

• 24 And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took her as his wife, 25 and kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus.

Mt 1:18

Can only refer to sex because "before they had sex she became pregnant" reinforces the virgin birth. But "before they began living together does not support the virgin birth". It was not normal to live together or have sex when betrothed, giving powerful evidence that the reference is to sex, not co-habitation. What value is there in mentioning that it was merely before they started living together when the real point is that they were not only living separately, but had not had sex yet!

• Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows. When His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit.

John 2:12 & John 7:1 & Acts 1:14 & Galatians 1:19 & 1 Corinthians 9:5

These verses prove beyond any question that Jesus had literal blood brothers through Mary. Notice that brother cannot refer to "brethren in the church" kind of usage because other "brethren in the church" are listed beside "Jesus brothers". Of the 20+ times "Jesus brothers" are referred to. NEVER are they called cousins or relatives. How could the Holy Spirit say it to make the fact any clearer?

• • John 2:12 After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days.
• John 7:1 And after these things Jesus was walking in Galilee; for He was unwilling to walk in Judea, because the Jews were seeking to kill Him. 2 Now the feast of the Jews, the Feast of Booths, was at hand. 3 His brothers therefore said to Him, "Depart from here, and go into Judea, that Your disciples also may behold Your works which You are doing. 4 "For no one does anything in secret, when he himself seeks to be known publicly. If You do these things, show Yourself to the world." 5 For not even His brothers were believing in Him. 6 Jesus therefore *said to them, "My time is not yet at hand, but your time is always opportune. 7 "The world cannot hate you; but it hates Me because I testify of it, that its deeds are evil. 8 "Go up to the feast yourselves; I do not go up to this feast because My time has not yet fully come." 9 And having said these things to them, He stayed in Galilee. 10 But when His brothers had gone up to the feast, then He Himself also went up, not publicly, but as it were, in secret.
  • Acts 1:14 And when they had entered, they went up to the upper room, where they were staying; that is, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon the Zealot, and Judas the son of James. 14 These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.
  • Galatians 1:18 Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lord's brother.
  • 1 Corinthians 9:4 Do we not have a right to eat and drink? 5 Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Are you still Roman Catholic after reading that?

Matthew 12:46 & Mk 3:31 & Lk 8:19

Jesus is distinguishing between blood brothers versus brothers of faith. Remember it was someone else who called them "mother and brothers" not Jesus. If the brothers are not literal, then neither is the mother. Cannot simply be cousins because Colossians 4:10 uses a separate Greek word. John 1:41 uses the same term of Peter and his brother.

• Mt 12:46 While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. 47 And someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You." 48 But He answered the one who was telling Him and said, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?" 49 And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, "Behold, My mother and My brothers! 50 "For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother."
• Mk 3:31And His mother and His brothers *arrived, and standing outside they sent word to Him, and called Him. 32 And a multitude was sitting around Him, and they *said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are outside looking for You." 33 And answering them, He *said,"Who are My mother and My brothers?" 34 And looking about on those who were sitting around Him, He *said, "Behold, My mother and My brothers! 35 "For whoever does the will of God, he is My brother and sister and mother."
• Lk 8:19And His mother and brothers came to Him, and they were unable to get to Him because of the crowd. 20 And it was reported to Him, "Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wishing to see You." 21 But He answered and said to them, "My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it."

Matthew 1:23-25

As clear as if it said, "kept a virgin until wedding day."

• 24 And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took her as his wife, 25 and kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus.

Mt 1:18

Can only refer to sex because "before they had sex she became pregnant" reinforces the virgin birth. But "before they began living together does not support the virgin birth". It was not normal to live together or have sex when betrothed, giving powerful evidence that the reference is to sex, not co-habitation. What value is there in mentioning that it was merely before they started living together when the real point is that they were not only living separately, but had not had sex yet!

• Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows. When His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit.

John 2:12 & John 7:1 & Acts 1:14 & Galatians 1:19 & 1 Corinthians 9:5

These verses prove beyond any question that Jesus had literal blood brothers through Mary. Notice that brother cannot refer to "brethren in the church" kind of usage because other "brethren in the church" are listed beside "Jesus brothers". Of the 20+ times "Jesus brothers" are referred to. NEVER are they called cousins or relatives. How could the Holy Spirit say it to make the fact any clearer?

• • John 2:12 After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days.
• John 7:1 And after these things Jesus was walking in Galilee; for He was unwilling to walk in Judea, because the Jews were seeking to kill Him. 2 Now the feast of the Jews, the Feast of Booths, was at hand. 3 His brothers therefore said to Him, "Depart from here, and go into Judea, that Your disciples also may behold Your works which You are doing. 4 "For no one does anything in secret, when he himself seeks to be known publicly. If You do these things, show Yourself to the world." 5 For not even His brothers were believing in Him. 6 Jesus therefore *said to them, "My time is not yet at hand, but your time is always opportune. 7 "The world cannot hate you; but it hates Me because I testify of it, that its deeds are evil. 8 "Go up to the feast yourselves; I do not go up to this feast because My time has not yet fully come." 9 And having said these things to them, He stayed in Galilee. 10 But when His brothers had gone up to the feast, then He Himself also went up, not publicly, but as it were, in secret.
  • Acts 1:14 And when they had entered, they went up to the upper room, where they were staying; that is, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon the Zealot, and Judas the son of James. 14 These all with one mind were continually devoting themselves to prayer, along with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.
  • Galatians 1:18 Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 But I did not see any other of the apostles except James, the Lord's brother.
  • 1 Corinthians 9:4 Do we not have a right to eat and drink? 5 Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?

Colossians 4:10

Cannot simply be cousins because Colossians 4:10 uses a separate Greek word.

• Aristarchus, my fellow prisoner, sends you his greetings; and also Barnabas' cousin Mark (about whom you received instructions: if he comes to you, welcome him);

The bible never uses these two Greek words anepsios or sungenis in reference to Jesus brothers. For Catholic doctrine to be true,

Greek Dictionary: cousin/Relative:

1. anepsios(ajneyiov" , (431)), in Col. 4:10 denotes a cousin rather than a nephew (A.V., "sister's son"). "Cousin" is its meaning in various periods of Greek writers.¶ In this sense it is used in the Sept., in Numb. 36:11.¶ In later writings it denotes a nephew; hence the A.V. rendering. As Lightfoot says, there is no reason to suppose that the Apostle would have used it in any other than its proper sense. We are to understand, therefore, that Mark was the cousin of Barnabas.
2. sungenis(suggeniv" , (4773)) in Luke 1:36 (so in the most authentic mss.) and sungeneµs in ver. 58 (plural), A.V., "cousin" and "cousins," respectively signify "kinswoman" and "kinsfolk," (R.V.); so the R.V. and A.V. in 2:44 and 21:16. The word lit. signifies 'born with,' i.e., of the same stock, or descent; hence kinsman, kindred. See Kin, Kinsfolk, Kinswoman.
   • Note: In Col. 4:10, A.V., anepsios (cp. Lat., nepos, whence Eng., nephew), a cousin (so, R.V.), is translated "sister's son." See Cousin.¶

John 1:41

the term brother is never used in the New Testament to denote a cousin or relative or anything other than a literal BROTHER.

• John 1:41 He *found first his own brother Simon, and *said to him, "We have found the Messiah"

By Steve Rudd

Catholics wrong: Mary had many other children in addition to Jesus

 

[mdk]

Yup...still a Roman Catholic. lol

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

ntx-communion-transubstantiation

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Yup...still a Roman Catholic. lol

Keep reading. You'll learn the truth and then you can either decide to follow Jesus Christ or continue to follow a false religion that will take you to hell. I pray you choose Jesus Christ, mdk.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Refuted: The false doctrine of Catholic "transubstantiation" and Orthodox "Real Presence"

The Lord's Supper: Transubstantiation, Real PresenceRefuted: The Catholic false doctrine of "transubstantiation".
Transubstantiation is a close cousin to Gnostic theology because both false doctrines claim that "things are not what they appear".

The Bible Blueprint of the Lord's Supper (the Bible pattern)

Introduction:

The Catholic and Greek Orthodox false doctrine of "transubstantiation" teaches that the bread and juice undergo a change to become the literal body and blood of Christ.

A. Transubstantiation is a false doctrine for the following reasons:

1. No Bible verse teaches transubstantiation. Supposed proof texts put forward by Roman Catholic and Orthodox advocates are most naturally seen as proving that the bread and juice were symbols of the body and blood. To see transubstantiation in these texts requires one to strain the text as much as our mind.
2. Transubstantiation is a false doctrine because Jesus is not a liar: In Mt 26:29 after Jesus had said, "this is my blood" and prayed, he still referred to the contents as, "fruit of the vine". If transubstantiation of the juice into blood had occurred, as both Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches say it was at this time, then Jesus would never have referred to it as "fruit of the vine' but rather "blood". This proves that when Jesus said "take eat & drink" he LITERALLY gave them bread and juice.
3. In like manner, Paul also refers to the elements of the Lord's Supper as "eat this bread and drink the cup" in 1 Cor 11:26 after they should be transubstantiated. 1 Cor 11:26-27 proves transubstantiation wrong because Paul calls the loaf, "bread" after both Roman Catholics and Orthodox say the "change" was supposed to take place. Catholics make Paul a liar by calling the loaf "bread" rather than what Catholic false doctrine claims it was: Literal Flesh.
4. In 1 Corinthians 11:25, Jesus said literally that the "cup was the covenant". So which is it? Is the it the juice that is the covenant or the juice that is the blood? Is it the cup that is the covenant or is the cup the blood?
5. In 1 Cor 11:26-28, Paul instructs us to "drink the cup" instead of "drink the blood". The Holy Spirit would not use such a figure of speech as "synecdoche" (referring to a part for the whole) if such a literal transubstantiation was actually taking place. To use a symbol when such a literal change is taking place is unthinkable.
6. Transubstantiation is a false doctrine because Jesus instituted Lord's Supper before his blood was shed and body broken! He spoke of His blood being shed, which was still yet future. This proves it was a symbol.
7. The very record of historically, (Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian and Hippolytus) which the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches love to quote as authority, proves that before 200 AD, the church viewed the bread and juice as symbols. Conversely, the earliest historical hint of transubstantiation was in the 4th century.
8. Obviously Jesus words, "this is my body" should be taken symbolically because it falls within a long list of symbolic statements Christ said: "I am the bread," (John 6:41), "I am the vine," (John 15:5), "I am the door," (John 10:7,9), "I am the good shepherd,"(John 10:11,12), "You are the world the salt, (Matthew 5:13), "You are the light of the world the salt, (Matthew 5:14)
9. The apostasy of withholding the Cup: Roman Catholics, in the 1415 AD Council of Constance, decreed that the laity could no longer drink of the cup, but the bread alone. This is completely contrary to Scripture and the earliest church traditions. Jesus' own words are "drink from it, all of you" Matthew 26:26 and in Mark 14:22-23 it says "He gave it to them, and they all drank from it." The Greek Orthodox church does not withhold the juice.
10. The Greek orthodox church violates the Bible pattern by using leavened bread, whereas Roman Catholics use unleavened bread, just as Jesus did, (Matthew 26:17) and the Bible records in 1 Cor 5:7-8. Both Roman Catholic and Greek orthodox churches violate the Bible pattern by using leavened wine, instead of unleavened grape juice.
11. The Greek orthodox church violates the Bible pattern by using a "communion spoon" to dip into the cup to retrieve some wine-soaked bread. The Bible pattern for the Lord's Supper is that the bread and juice are not combined, but are two separate steps of "Holy communion".
12. We wonder why Roman Catholics and Orthodox doubt God will grant his full grace and love in the symbolic elements of the bread and the juice? Why is it so hard for them to believe that He grants us the full grace of His Body and Blood via symbols? The water of baptism washes away sin: Acts 2:38; 22:16. You don't get your sins forgiven until you are immersed in water! Water is a symbol of the blood that literally removes sin. For Roman Catholics and Orthodox to believe in "real presence", is as logical as the idea that water of baptism turns into literal blood!

B. Catholics and Orthodox misrepresent history:

Transubstantiation is completely unbiblical, being a doctrine that grew out of the Gnostic controversies of the mid second century and gradually developing to full flower in the 4th century. The Gnostics claimed that Jesus did not have literal flesh and blood, it only appeared that way. The early post-apostolic Christians countered that Jesus indeed had ordinary human flesh and blood and they began to emphasize this in the Lord's Supper.

"The early centuries were not exercised with a "moment" of consecration, for they had not become concerned with a conversion in the elements." (Early Christians Speak, Everett Ferguson, 1981, p 114)

Orthodox writers misrepresent history, but correctly identify the Lord's Supper as a battle ground between Christians and Gnostics.

"In the early Church, the only people who denied that the Eucharist was truly the Body and Blood of Christ were those who also denied that the Word had truly become man." (THE WAY: What Every Protestant Should Know About the Orthodox Church, Clark Carlton, 1997, p 173)

The historically accurate way of saying this would be:

"In the early Church, before 200AD, both Gnostics and the church took the same symbolic view of the bread and juice. Some Gnostics refused to eat the Lord's Supper altogether. Transubstantiation was not an issue that was discussed. By the fourth century, the church drifted away from the original symbolic view of the Apostles and began to teach transubstantiation. Only in the fourth century, were Gnostics isolated in their symbolic view. But amazingly, they were the ones who maintained the Apostolic traditional view. It was the church that had changed her theology towards transubstantiation."

Some Gnostics groups refused to break bread altogether. The only churches today that do not break bread at all, like the Gnostics, are groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Salvation Army. But even still, the 2nd century Gnostics and the church both viewed the elements of the Lord's Supper as symbolic. Transubstantiation was never the issue at this time.

But those Gnostics who did partake of the Table of the Lord, were openly criticized by the church as being inconsistent.

"How can they (Gnostics) be consistent with, themselves when they say the bread for which they give thanks is the body of their Lord and the cup his blood, if they do not say he is the Son of the Creator of the world? ... Let them either change their views or avoid offering the bread and wine. But our view is in harmony with the eucharist, and the eucharist confirms our view". (Irenaeus, Against Heresies IV.xviii.4, 5)

Amazingly the language of the Gnostics was the same literalistic language used by the church:

"they say the bread for which they give thanks is the body of their Lord and the cup his blood". (Irenaeus, Against Heresies IV.xviii.4, 5)

In truth, however, this literalistic language was typical of how everyone talked on all sides of the debate before 200AD. But we want to note that the Orthodox statement is quite wrong when they say the Gnostics distinguished between transubstantiation and the symbolic view, for they in fact used the same identical literalistic language as the church. For Roman Catholic and Orthodox historians to be consistent, they would need to admit, that if the literalistic language of "this is my body" proves transubstantiation, then they are forced to admit that the Gnostics at the time of Irenaeus in 180 AD, also believed in transubstantiation. Of course the truth is that both the church and Gnostics taught the symbolic view, while employing the same literalistic language.

In fact, the logic employed by early church leaders like Irenaeus to defeat Gnosticism, were specifically based upon a symbolic, non-transubstantiation view of communion. In other words, Irenaeus' whole argument would have been defeated, if he believed in Transubstantiation. The very logic of Irenaeus' argument is that the Lord's supper is composed of natural elements of common juice and bread.

"He (the Gnostic) acknowledged the created cup with which he moistens our blood as his own blood, and he confirmed the created bread from which our bodies grow as his own body. Since therefore the cup that has been mixed and the bread that has been made, from which things the substance of our flesh grows and is sustained, receive the word of God and the eucharist becomes the body of Christ, how do they say that the flesh which is nourished from the body and blood of the Lord and is a member of him is incapable of receiving the gift of God which is eternal life?" (Irenaeus, Against Heresies V.ii.2, 3)

The Gnostics viewed everything physical as evil. Had Irenaeus argued that the natural elements of common juice and bread were transubstantiated into something different than what they appear, namely the body and blood of Christ, the Gnostics would have agreed completely, while maintaining their view that the body of Christ was not composed of natural elements, but only appeared to be. Had Irenaeus been arguing transubstantiation, the Gnostics would have countered, "We agree and it proves Jesus did not have literal flesh and blood. Just as you (Irenaeus) have argued that the bread and juice must be transubstantiated into something that is undetectable to our senses, we argue that the reason it is undetectable to our senses, is because the literal body and blood of Christ on the cross, like the bread and juice, were not what they appear!

"Irenaeus has the realist terminology but not the realist thought. There is no conversion of the elements. Indeed, if there were any change in the substance of the elements, his argument that our bodies -in reality, not in appearance- are raised would be subverted." (Early Christians Speak, Everett Ferguson, 1981, p 114)

So it was critical that Irenaeus specifically avoid the doctrine of transubstantiation in his recorded argument against the Gnostics.

The way the church refuted the Gnostics was based upon the symbolic view. As late as 200 AD, Tertullian bases the reality of Christ's body on the cross, upon the fact that the bread is symbolic:

"Taking bread and distributing it to his disciples he made it his own body by saying, "This is my body," that is a "figure of my body." On the other hand, there would not have been a figure unless there was a true body." (Tertullian, Against Marcion IV. 40)

This is the kind of historical information that Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches keep from their people. Both the early church and the Gnostics rejected transubstantiation and took the symbolic view.

C. Transubstantiation is unorthodox and violates Apostolic tradition:

Roman Catholics and Orthodox misrepresent the historical development of Transubstantiation, since its invention was no sooner than the third century. After all, Transubstantiation only became official Catholic doctrine in 1215 AD, with Pope Innocent III, in the Fourth Lateran Council. So before 200 AD, when writers said that the unleavened grape juice and bread were the body and blood of Christ, they were merely borrowing the words of Christ: "This is my body" etc. It is clear, however, that the church understood this in the symbolic sense, not in the later false doctrine of Transubstantiation.

ntx-communion-transubstantiation

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

ntx-communion-transubstantiation

Here are the historical records that are usually never quoted by Roman Catholic and Orthodox writers because they know it destroys their case.

1. Justin Martyr (150 AD):

Justin Martyr would reject transubstantiation because he referred to the unleavened bread as a "remembrance of His being made flesh", not that the bread was the literal body. He also referred to the unleavened juice as "in remembrance of His own blood" not that the juice was the literal blood of Christ:

"Now it is evident, that in this prophecy [Isa 33:13-19] to the bread which our Christ gave us to eat, in remembrance of His being made fleshfor the sake of His believers, for whom also He suffered; and to the cup which He gave us to drink, in remembrance of His own blood, with giving of thanks." (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, ch 70)

2. Irenaeus (180 AD):

Irenaeus refutes the Gnostics on the basis that the Lord would not use "evil material things" like bread and juice in the Lord's Supper. Had Irenaeus argued that the bread and juice Transubstantiated (changed) into something different from what they appear, the Gnostics would have agreed, saying this change was essential because Jesus did not have physical flesh either!

"Irenaeus has the realist terminology but not the realist thought. There is no conversion of the elements. Indeed, if there were any change in the substance of the elements, his argument that our bodies-in reality, not in appearance-are raised would be subverted." (Early Christians Speak, Everett Ferguson, 1981, p 114)

3. Tertullian (200 AD):

Tertullian comes right out and states that the bread is a mere symbol of the body of Christ and specifically refutes the Gnostics on this basis:

"Taking bread and distributing it to his disciples he made it his own body by saying, "This is my body," that is a "figure of my body." On the other hand, there would not have been a figure unless there was a true body." (Tertullian, Against Marcion IV. 40)

4. Cyprian (200 AD):

Augustine as late at 400 AD, quotes Cyprian as saying that the juice is offered in remembrance as a type and foreshadow of the blood of Christ:

""Observe" he (Cyprian) says, in presenting the cup, to maintain the custom handed down to us from the Lord, and to do nothing that our Lord has not first done for us: so that the cup which is offered in remembrance of Him should be mixed with wine. For, as Christ says, 'I am the true vine,' it follows that the blood of Christ is wine, not water; and the cup cannot appear to contain His blood by which we are redeemed and quickened, if the wine be absent; for by the wine is the blood of Christ typified, that blood which is foreshadowed and proclaimed in all the types and declarations of Scripture." (Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, book 4, ch 21, quoting Cyprian)

The same situation prevails in the writings of Tertullian and Cyprian: ... both men when they speak with precision distinguish the symbol from what it represents. The bread was a "figure" of the body. But Tertullian turns the word figura against the Docetism of Marcion (IX.6). The language of symbolism does not help those who deny a real body to Jesus. The bread would not be a figure unless there was first a true body of which it was a figure. There is no shadow without a substance to cast the shadow. Similarly, for Cyprian, literal language about drinking Christ's blood is balanced by language of "remembrance" (X.5) and "representation" (IX.7). Both symbolism and realism are present in the thought of Cyprian and Tertullian. The symbolism concerns bread and wine as signs. (Early Christians Speak, Everett Ferguson, 1981, p 115)

4. Hippolytus (200 AD):

Hippolytus speaking of the Lord's Supper as an antitype based upon Prov 9:1:

"And she hath furnished her table: "that denotes the promised knowledge of the Holy Trinity; it also refers to His honoured and undefiled body and blood, which day by day are administered and offered sacrificially at the spiritual divine table, as a memorial of that first and ever-memorable table of the spiritual divine supper. (Hippolytus, Fragment from Commentary on Proverbs 9:1)

For Hippolytus, too, the bread and wine are the antitypes or likenesses of the reality portrayed. His consecration prayer (VIII.5) contains both the words of institution and petition for the Holy Spirit. But there is no suggestion of a change in the elements. (Early Christians Speak, Everett Ferguson, 1981, p 115)

 

[mdk]

Yup...still a Roman Catholic. lol

Keep reading. You'll learn the truth and then you can either decide to follow Jesus Christ or continue to follow a false religion that will take you to hell. I pray you choose Jesus Christ, mdk.

No thanks. I am pretty good. Besides, it doesn't matter what faith I hold dear as all of them already condemn me to hell.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

The Devil's Plan:

The devil wanted to get the church to go into apostasy. So he started with the Gnostics who argued Jesus only appeared to have literal flesh and blood, but in fact he did not. After 200 years of anti-Gnostic battling, the church, finally adopted a remarkably similar view! Transubstantiation teaches that, although the elements of the Lord's Supper appear to be literal grape juice and bread, they are not what they appear. They are in fact different than what the 5 human senses tell us they really are: the literal blood and flesh of Christ. Our senses are deceiving us!

At first (100-200 AD) the church merely began to emphasize to the Gnostics, that the symbols of the Lord's Supper were based upon a literal flesh of Christ. In time, however, between 225 and 300 AD, the church began to counter the Gnostic theology in a new way. Whereas before, they had argued that the symbols of the bread and juice must be based upon a literal body, they suddenly began to emphasizing the literalistic language Jesus: "this is my body" against the Gnostics. Although this new line of reasoning that began no sooner than 225 AD, was successful, it required an abandonment of the orthodox arguments used the century before, which were all directly based upon the symbolic view. But now the Devil had succeeded in getting the church to use one false doctrine (Transubstantiation) to defeat another: Gnosticism. Refuting one false doctrine with another is quite common in theological debates and the reader needs to be aware of this. For example, Seventh-day Adventists convert all kinds of Catholics to Saturday worship because Catholics mistakenly call Sunday the Sabbath. The Adventist correctly points out that the 7th day Sabbath is Saturday, but completely overlooks the fact that the Sabbath law itself was abolished. Thus Adventist false doctrine merely converts the Catholic from one false doctrine to another. In like manner, the church between 225 - 300 AD defeated the Gnostic false doctrine with the false doctrine of Transubstantiation.

E. Transubstantiation is a close cousin to Gnosticism:

While the Gnostics claimed the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ on the cross was different than what it appeared to be, so too the church began to claim that the bread and juice were not what they appeared to be. Transubstantiation, therefore, is a close cousin to Gnostic theology because both false doctrines claim that "things are not what they appear".

ntx-communion-transubstantiation