Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Catholic Church & Jesus Christ-Why No One Should Be A Catholic
Apostolic Messianic Fellowship ^ | August 30, 2005 | Why No One Should Be A Catholic

Posted on 03/04/2007 8:21:23 AM PST by Iscool

Catholic Church & Jesus Christ By Pastor G. Reckart International Copyright All Rights Reserved August 30, 2005

Why No One Should Be A Catholic

The first thing a Catholic learns when they open their Bible is they cannot buy their way out of hell fire.

When a Catholic looks in the Bible they will not find purgatory. They will not find priests taking money to say a Mass to get souls out of the fires of hell. The Catholic church is popular because many do not want much out of religion and the Catholic church offers them the little they want. Yet many do want more of God and to obtain it they must leave the Catholic church. In the past 30 years it is estimated over 150 million Catholics have left the Catholic church seeking more of God from other religions. Catholicism remains popular because a Catholic can sin all the way to purgatory and someone can buy their way out of hell fire right into heaven. Over 150 million Catholics read the Bible and could not find purgatory and giving priests money to say a Mass to get souls out of the flames of hell fire. If a Catholic will open their Bible and search they will not find these either. No where in the New Testament is there a priest who takes money to say a Mass to get souls out of hell. Maybe God has been dealing with you showing you the Catholic church is not right? Now is the time to accept God's will and leave.

One of the good things about Catholics is their desire to help people. So if a loved one dies and they did not live a holy life it is understood they must go to Purgatory and suffer in hell fire until a priest can get them released to go to heaven. Catholics are very loving and ready to give large sums of money to help these poor souls. They really believe that by buying a Mass for these dead souls in Purgatory they will be released from hell fire to go to heaven. This is great love for people no doubt about that. But, all this love and all this money will never save a soul who has died lost and is in hell fire torment. The Catholic church has used the love and affection of its members to make billions of dollars in profit saying a Mass for loved ones. This has been fraud for many centuries. The Catholic church developed this money scheme to milk loving Catholics who cared for a deceased loved one. According to Catholicism, its members can pay money to the priests and empty purgatory hell fire of all Catholics. This is not true and it has not been true for 1600 years. Why do good and honest people put up with this scheme from the Catholic church? They do so because they are scared of the Catholic church and its priests. Those Catholics who look into the Bible will not find Purgatory, priest collecting money to say a Mass, or the Catholic church. This is why a person should not be a Catholic.

Thousands of Catholics each year are leaving the church of Rome. Why? They are leaving because they no longer believe the Catholic church is the true Church of the Bible. They discover the Catholic church is filled with falsehood, lies, and deceptions. They learn it has no biblical authority for its religious rituals and the majority of its teachings are perversions of scripture. When they look for the Catholic church in the New Testament of the Bible they cannot find it at all. When they look for the rituals practiced they cannot find them. When they search for a pope or priest performing the Mass they cannot find one. When they look for Jesus Christ to be a Catholic they are shocked he was not a Catholic and never attended a Catholic church. When a Catholic takes a good look in the Bible he/she will learn they have been in a false religion all along and brainwashed to believe they were in the true one and only. True Christianity is not Catholic. Christianity existed 295 years before the Catholic church was founded.

Catholics are right to leave the Catholic church. After all they must save their souls and if the Catholic church does not have the true Gospel message of salvation that will save sinners THEY SHOULD ESCAPE and quick! Of course the priest will try numerous tricks to keep Catholics in the church.

No one can be a true Christian and a Catholic at the same time.

The second thing a Catholic learns is that Jesus was not the founder of the Catholic Church.

When a Catholic opens their Bible they will never find Jesus in or near a Catholic church. When they open their Bible they will learn that Jesus was not a Catholic and was not the founder of the Catholic religion. They learn the word "Catholic" is not in the Bible. They then learn the Catholic church took up the name "Catholic" from Latin which means "universal." The Catholic church claims it is "universal" or world wide. It claims it is the oldest and ONLY WORLD WIDE RELIGION OF CHRISTIANITY STARTED BY JESUS CHRIST. When Catholics discover this is false, that Jesus started a Jewish religion, they soon learn the Catholic church is not Jewish at all but is Gentile owned, Gentile operated, and a Gentile controlled business enterprise whose product is paganized religion. When Catholics open their eyes and see that the Catholic church has adopted many pagan and heathen celebrations and practices and adapted these to Christian teachings, they know they have to leave. No, they know they have to run! It is right here, they know Jesus Christ was not the founder of the Catholic church. Because Jesus would not start a Church and then allow the gates of hell to conquer it by adopting pagan religious practices. No, Jesus would keep his Church pure and free from all evil and sin. The Catholic church is not such a Church. Jesus was not the founder of the Catholic church and Catholics learn they must leave it immediately.

The third thing a Catholic learns, is they do not receive Jesus Christ as Savior when the Eucharist wafer is placed on their tongue.

When a Catholic opens their Bible they will not find the small wafer as pictured on the left. They will not find anyone sticking out their tongue to have the wafer placed there by a Catholic priest. Catholics are taught that when they go forward at the end of the Mass, they do so to receive the flesh of Jesus. The devout Catholic presents him/her self before the priest, open their mouth, stick out their tongue, and he deposits the flesh of Jesus in the form of this wafer. The Catholic is now told he has eternal life because he has eaten the flesh of Jesus. Salvation in the Catholic church is totally and completely in the Mass. They do not preach Acts 2:38 and the necessity of salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, and through Christ alone. According to the Catholic religion, a person must attend Mass, believe the pope is the vicar of God, accept the Catholic church as the one and only true Church, and then receive the Eucharist on the tongue to be saved. But when a Catholic searches the Bible for the Mass and the Eucharist wafer they cannot find them. They discover the Catholic church has never followed the Biblical Lord's Supper (Communion or Passover). In fact they will learn the Catholic church does not follow the New Testament at all in the Communion observance of the Lord's flesh and blood.

The Catholic church departed from the ancient practice of Jerusalem and the Eastern churches of Asia in observing the Lord's Passover on the evening of the 14th of Nisan. The church of Rome has tried to destroy this ancient Passover observance since 325AD and the Council of Nicaea. At issue here is if the Church Jesus founded observed an annual celebration of his death on the annual Jewish Passover as he commanded (do this in remembrance of me--which includes the Cup, the unleavened bread, and washing of feet). Any Catholic who studies history will learn the early Christians did indeed celebrate the Lord's Passover on an annual basis on the same day the Jews observed their Passover. This practice was brought to Asia not only by the Apostle Paul, but the Apostle John and the Evangelist Philip.

The Asian Christian Churches followed the ancient custom of Jerusalem, celebrating the annual day of the death of Jesus on the Jew's Passover evening. This is certified by no less then such great men of God as Polycarp and Polycrates both of Ephesus. The whole of the Asian Churches held the eve of the 14th of Nisan as the annual celebration of the Lord's Passion on the same day the Jews observed their annual Passover. All the Asian Churches held a conference and refused to change to practice Easter and sent a letter to Victor Bishop of Rome, who then wrote letters to all the Bishops of the world to excommunicate them from the Christian Church (although he had no such power). The response of Polycrates (190AD) is documented history. The Catholic church at the Council of Nicaea in 325AD, formerly adopted the practice of observing the Easter resurrection of Jesus AND NOT HIS DEATH! Jesus instituted the memorial of his death in the new Passover and sealed this as an annual celebration. He sealed the memorial of his resurrection in New Testament baptism.

Out of the Council of Nicaea came the Catholic law not to observe the Lord's Passover on the day, evening, and time he instituted it. The Bishops at the Council switched over to celebrate the Easter resurrection and held this as an annual day. Easter is now an annual day while the Lord's Communion was moved inside newly adopted pagan mystery Mass. The Mass is held many times a day contrary to what Jesus instituted for the Communion Passover. When a Catholic sees this, they know Rome and the Council of Nicaea falsified the command of Jesus to observe the annual Passover held in honor of his death as the Passover Lamb. A Catholic has every right to leave the Catholic church and go back to what Jesus instituted and he did not institute the Mass. Jesus was not the founder of the Catholic church or its Mass.

So, the Eastern Asian Churches continued the Jerusalem practice of the Lord's Passover on the eve of the 14th of Nisan. The Western and African churches controlled by Rome began to observe the resurrection which they called Easter (Easter is the spring pagan goddess Eostre). Those who celebrate Easter are observing a pagan holiday manufactured by the papacy.

It is here that Catholics learn the Catholic church adopted a pagan name for the resurrection of Jesus. This is shocking to Catholics when they see it. It is shocking to Catholics to learn that no Church in the Bible ever observed the day of the resurrection on an annual basis: but instead observed it on the occasion of each and every baptism of a convert. But the Churches did observe the Lord's Passover on the same day the Jews celebrated their Passover.

When Catholics learn the Councils were not holy meetings of the True Apostolic Church, they want out and leave. Over 500 million people world-wide have rejected the claims of the Catholic church. When a Catholic has Bible study and learns what the true Church really believed and practiced, they see the real Church Jesus established. They will eagerly accept the Lord's Communion and observe it because it is the Thanksforgiving Feast of the Lord's Passover. They are willing to give up the paganism of Easter. It is right here that the Catholic learns the bread and wine are only symbols and do not turn into the real flesh and blood of Jesus. When they learn they cannot receive Christ as Savior by sticking out their tongue, they will leave the Catholic church. When they come to the truth that the Catholic Eucharist is a falsehood they will never stick out their tongue again to receive it. Catholic priests, monks, archbishops, cardinals, and popes will shudder of this, but no one in the Bible received Jesus Christ as Savior by sticking out their tongue and receiving a wafer that is said to be the real flesh of Jesus. When a Catholic gets a firm grip on the Word of God and understands the true Passover of the Lord Jesus they will never return to a Catholic church ever again.

The fourth thing a Catholic learns is the Mass is not found in the Bible any where.

When a Catholic opens the Bible they will not find the Mass. They will not find a crucifix used by the New Testament Church. They will not find a Catholic style altar at all. All Catholics know the center of the Catholic religion is the Mass. It is the ritual artificial re-crucifixion of Jesus by a priest as he takes the cup of wine and presents it to a crucifix of Jesus on the cross and recites a prayer in Latin. Concluding his prayer the wine magically is turned into the blood of Jesus. He then gulps this down and does not share a drop with the members attending. Where did this practice originate that only priests can drink from the Cup? Paul did not teach this to the Corinthians! Next the priest picks up the IHS wafer and holds it high before the crucifix as he mumbles another prayer in Latin. Usually there is music and a song immediately after the consecration that turns the bread and wine into the flesh and blood of Jesus. This is to embellish the moment of the occasion and give it a sense of holiness. The priest then summons the faithful to come forward and receive Christ as Savior. Believing they are receiving Christ as Savior they flock to the front and stick out their tongue to receive Jesus.

But when a Catholic looks into the Bible for this mystery ritual Mass they will not find it. They learn the Mass is nothing but a borrowed pagan ritual from the temple of Jove. They learn there is no Mass found anywhere in the New Testament. They cannot find a single person sticking out their tongue to receive Christ as their Savior. They cannot find a Latin Mass. They cannot find a priest drinking the cup of wine all to himself. These things are not in the Bible any where. The New Testament records everything about the Christian Church. And the Catholic Mass is not found there. One Catholic woman said: "when I tried to find the Mass in the Bible and it was not there, I knew in my heart I had been deceived."

What is the Mass? It is an artificial sacrifice. It is a mock sacrifice. It is the priest recrucifying Jesus in the emblems of the Eucharist and the Cup. Where in the Bible are we to think that observing the Lord's Communion or Passover memorial we are recrucifying Jesus on the Cross? It is not there! When a Catholic looks in the Bible for a priest to hold in his hands the Eucharist wafer and turn it into the flesh of Jesus, he/she will not find it. When they look in the Bible for a place where a priest blesses the cup and turns it into the blood of Jesus he/she cannot find it. This is shocking! Why is the Catholic church doing something that is not in the Bible . Why are they performing a ritual that no Apostle or Minister of the Christian Church did? Why is the central religious ritual of the Catholic church completely missing from the Bible? It is not there. The Catholic who learns this discovers also that the daily multiple Mass observance to recrucify the Lord Jesus is not in the Bible. Yes, the Mass is a recrucification of Jesus every time the priest holds it. There must be fresh flesh and fresh blood of Jesus in the Catholic church several times a day or the Catholic church has no Mass. How many times a day in all the Catholic churches throughout the world is Christ recrucified every day? In the Bible those who crucify to themselves Christ afresh are accursed. There is not one Mass to be found any where in the Bible. Just because the Catholic church points to Jesus observing the Jewish Passover does not make it a Mass. Jesus observed the Passover and then instituted his own annual Passover. He did not institute the ritual of the Mass as the Catholic church practices today. And what of washing feet which Jesus did and commanded of his Apostles. Why, in over 1,700 years has the Catholic church NEVER PRACTICED WASHING OF FEET at the Communion as Jesus established? It does not because the Mass is not a true representation of the annual Passover Memorial Jesus instituted. At no time did Jesus hint or indicate his Memorial was to be a daily ritual. When Catholics learn this, they know in their heart of hearts this is not the true Church.

What is the fifth thing a Catholic learns is there is no confession booth in the Bible.

They discover the confession booth is all a fraud and a sham. They cannot find it any where in the Bible either. The Catholic church just made up religious stuff and got people to believe it. People who never read the Bible to check if what they are doing is even in there. When a Catholic searches the Bible for the confession booth and cannot find it they know going to a priest to confess their sins was nothing but the way the Catholic church learns everything sinful that is taking place in a person's life or home. They learn the priest has used the confessional to extract sex stories out of young girls and boys. Many altar boys were homosexualized using the confession booth as a tool of contact and seduction by the priest. What is so shocking about this instrument of the church is that no where are Christians told they must go to a New Testament Minister or Preacher to confess their sins to receive forgiveness. When the Catholic learns they can go straight to God in their own prayer, at home, in the car, at work, or at a place of worship: they have no need for a confessional ever again. And, how is it that a sinful priest can tell a sinner to say five hail-Marys and put some money in the poor box and this is the penance for their stealing, lying, adultery, fornication, gambling, homosexuality, lesbianism, drug use, and other sins? How can a priest guilty of most of the same sins who has not confessed himself to some other sinful priest, going to be able to grant indulgences and pardons? When a Catholic really thinks about this, they know they were members of a church that was not the Christian Church of the Bible. They know they must read their Bible and find a Church that matches the Church of the Bible.

The sixth thing a Catholic learns is there is no Pope in the Bible and Peter was not the first Pope.

A Catholic who opens the Bible will discover there is no pope. Yes, they learn the claim Peter was the first pope is false. They will not find a pope in the Bible, and what's more they will not find the pope's fish hat or his fancy gold worn by Peter. No, they will discover the Pontiff title is another religious title stolen from the high priest of the temple of Jove. They learn Peter never was a pope and never was the recognized leader of the Christian Church. Indeed, he was given the keys to the Kingdom in Matthew 16:19 but these when used on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2), in Samaria (Acts 8), and in Caesarea (Acts 10), afterward ceasing to be needed. He opened up the Kingdom gates of the Church to the whole world. He was not given the keys as a signal he held the position of Pope. Once the gates to the Kingdom were opened no man could shut them. No where in the Bible did Peter pass these keys on to a successor.

Who was the man who presided over the New Testament Church? Was it Peter? No! It was Jacob (James) the firstborn son of Mary by Joseph after Jesus was born. This half-brother of the Lord arose and took over the leadership of the Church and we find him in that position in Acts 15. Peter never was the head of the Christian Church so he could not have been the first pope of a fictitious Catholic church. How come, if Jesus is the founder of the Catholic church he is not the first pope? Most Catholics never seem to get out of the Catholic box far enough to ask themselves some important questions. The invention of a Gentile pope to run the Catholic church was in the fourth century.

All the pre-Nicene books were rewritten in such a way to create a legacy of supposed Western or Latin Roman pontiffs who ruled the entire Christian Church world. The title of Pontiff comes from Latin paganism. The title Pontiff is not in the Bible any where (it is another Catholic falsehood).

There are men mentioned in the history of the Catholic church as popes who may have never existed. They can be proven to exist only in the post Nicene books written to reinforce Rome's claim to legitimate power and control over the Christian Church. The falsehood of the donation letter supposedly written by Constantine is an example of forgery and fraud within the Catholic church.

The whole idea, theory, and development of a succession of Latin pontiff popes from Peter to the present pope is all a massive fraud. There is no pope in the Bible and there never was a pope over the true Christian Church. Jesus reigns as King over the Church and his Ministers act as his ambassadors throughout the nations. This you will find in the Bible. You will not find a religious system with nuns, monks, archbishops, cardinals, prelates, and popes. A Catholic will not find a religious hierarchy of ascending ranks from laity to the pope as is found in the Catholic church. When a Catholic learns there is no pope in the Bible, they know once more they had been deceived by religious trickery and mental seduction. They know the Catholic church is not the true Church founded by Jesus Christ.

Take a look on the left at an ancient image of the fish god Dagon found in Mesopotamia. Look at his fish hat and that of the pope above. Any Catholic can see the Catholic church has adopted Dagan idolatry in hats to embellish their popes and priests and make them look religious to the world. The popes of Rome need to jerk that fish hat off, throw it down, stomp on it, and take it out and burn it. The pope should issue a Papal Bull it is never to be worn again by any pope or priest. Will they do it? No they will not do it and this is the reason the Catholic must run from the Catholic church and never look back. The Catholic church is not going to correct any of this falsehood, rituals, or heresies. It is a paganized Christian religion that has entrenched itself in many nations by bloodshed, threats, violence, and deception.

The seventh thing a Catholic learns is the 12 Apostles and New Testament Saints were not Catholic.

When a Catholic opens their Bible and tries to find the 12 Apostles and the Saints attending a Catholic church they will not find it. They learn from Bible study that all the New Testament Apostles and Saints were not Catholic. They learn the Catholic church surrounds themselves with images and idols of the Apostles and New Testament Saints to deceive members that the 12 Apostles and Saints were Catholic. It makes members think if these were all Catholic then they should be Catholic also. When they look at the images of the Apostles, Mary, Joseph, and Jesus, they are led to believe these chose the Catholic church because it is God's church. They never stop to think these images are put around a Catholic church to make people think it is the Church of God when it is not. Idols and images around a Catholic church is one of the biggest deceptions of the priests of Rome. It is an important tool used by the Catholic church to deceive the minds of members. The members are forced to think in a box. They never consider these were never Catholics. But when they open the Bible and see these were not Catholic their eyes come open and they see the Catholic church is not the Church of the Bible.

A Catholic who studies will learn there are no nuns, monks, priests, or popes in the Bible. They learn Mary was not worshiped. They learn she held no special position other then the Mother of the Messieh. They learn the Catholic church invented a white religion that is racist and portrays Mary, Joseph, Jesus as white people when they were black or brown. They learn that Rome deceives not only with false doctrine but with pictures, idols, and icons. They learn that the veneration, worship, and prayers to saints is not in the Bible. They learn the Catholic church did not give the world the Bible. The Bible existed before there was a Catholic church. They learn the Catholic church makes use of these so-called saints to embellish its pomp, rituals, church decor with images, and to make people think all these were Catholic.

None of the Saints of the New Testament Church were Catholic. None of them had ever been in a Catholic church. None were sprinkle baptized in the trinity. None ever doused themselves with holy water. None of them ever went to confession. Never prayed on the rosary. None attend a Mass. None celebrated Easter. In fact, when a Catholic looks in the Bible for adoration and veneration of saints he/she cannot find the practice of it any where. One of the claims of the Catholic church to Catholics is this: "You can believe the Catholic church is the true Church because it produced all the saints and such holy men and women as St Francis of Assisi, St Teresa of Avila, St. John Vianney, St Therese of Lizieux." Rome claims these and other holy saints produced by the Catholic church proves it is the true Church. But where is the adoration and veneration of saints in the Bible? Where in the Bible is there the making of idols and images of saints to stand around the church, in the foyer, outside the church, and in every nook and cranny? Idols and images are condemned in the Bible.

Where in the Bible did Christians make medallions to hang from one's neck as a luck charm or a fetish to ward off sickness, disease, or some other bad omen? There is none. The whole use of these so-called saints is to make Catholics think no other religion claiming to be Christian has such people in its ranks. The Catholic church uses these saints and their lives as a means to teach Catholic doctrine and compliance to the rules and codes. If a person rebels against the Catholic church they might lose the prayers of a saint on their behalf or the behalf of another loved one. So, to keep close to God a Catholic prays to these idols and gives money to their favorite saint-fan-club. When a Catholic learns there is no such practices found in the Bible they know they were deceived again. They know they must leave the Catholic church quickly because it is not the Church Jesus founded.

The eighth thing a Catholic learns is that Mary was never a Catholic.

When a Catholic opens their Bible they will not find Mary attending a Catholic Church. They will not find her as a Nun. They will not find a perpetual virgin. If Mary is not a Catholic there is no Catholic church. When a Catholic opens the Bible and learns Mary was not a Catholic and not the mother of God, they know they must leave the Catholic church.

Mary was the mother of the seed of David in which God was incarnated upon birth (1Tim 3:16). There is no greater deception and lie of the Catholic church then that Mary was a Catholic. Mary never attended a Catholic church in her life. She never heard of one in her life. She never saw or met a Catholic nun, monk, priest, or pope in her life. She never attended a Mass in her life. She was never sprinkle baptized by a priest of the Catholic church. She never prayed on a rosary. She never crossed herself with the sign of the Cross. She never doused herself with holy water. She never went to a confession booth. She never received penance from a Catholic priest.

Mary was not a Catholic. She was Jewish and a member of the Christian Jewish Church. This Christian Jewish Church was not Catholic. The Jewish Church did not develop into the Catholic church. The Catholic church is a complete Gentile creation of men established many centuries after Mary's death.

Mary was a Jewish woman of the tribe of Judah and the mother of Jesus the Messieh of Israel. She was mother of the seed of David, the man-child, and she was the unrecognized queen of Israel. She did not birth a God into the world.

Such teachings that she is God's mother makes Catholicism a laughing stock. How can the created birth the uncreated? Impossible you say! Agreed. Where was Mary when God created the heavens and the earth? She was not living yet. Where was Mary when God created Adam and Eve? She did not exist. To say Mary was the mother of God cannot be found any where in the Bible. When a Catholic looks for this verification and cannot find it, they know this is one more reason to leave the Catholic church. They ask themselves: if Mary was not a Catholic why should I be?

The Catholic church goes above honor of Mary, they make her a co-mediator with Christ. The Catholic church claims a Catholic can pray to Mary who will talk to her son who will talk to his Father and favor is granted because Mary is the mother of the Father's Son. Catholics are led to believe Mary can get the Father to do for them what they ask because God the Father would never deny the Mother of his Son. Is this procedure of praying to Mary any where in the Bible? It is not found there.

What is the theory behind this? In ancient times a person might be afraid to go directly to a king because they did not know how their situation might turn out. So, they sought a way to influence the king and who better to do this than his mother. So, a person might get the mother to mention something to the king and thereby soften up his attitude and or provoke him to do something good for a person his mother knows. After all, it is reasoned what king would not want to show honor and respect to his mother's wishes. So, a Catholic believes if they ask Mary, she will ask the Son and the Son will ask the Father and the Father will not deny the mother of his Son.

When a Catholic learns this is not in the Bible any where they know the Catholic church is not the true Church founded by Jesus. When they learn Mary was not a go-between to Jesus and to God the Father for others, this causes Catholics to see all this Maryology as nothing but a big religious sham. They should take this treasured Lady down from her place among idols throughout the world. They should stop praying to her because this is not in the Bible. They should stop teaching lies and falsehoods about Mary. Have they no respect for her? They should remove her from their churches because she was Jewish and not Catholic. When a Catholic learns that Mary was not a Catholic they have discovered the last thing they need to know that proves the Catholic church is not the Church Jesus founded.

As the light of Truth comes into the life of a Catholic they will see the Catholic church as an impostor. They will then take a second look at its sins, evils, and scandals. They will know from its birth in Nicaea in 325AD until today 2005 it is an evil religion that has cheated millions of true Bible salvation by its falsehood. The Catholic church has killed more people to establish and enforce the Catholic religion then any other religion in the world. Thousands have been murdered. Hundreds have been burned at the stake. More hundreds have been tortured. There are thousands of killed babies whom nuns birthed and the fathers were priests. Homosexuality is so out of control in the Catholic church among the priests, monks, and popes. If ever there was a church the gates of hell have prevailed against, it is the Catholic church. Catholic apologist claim these are just scars of sinners upon Christ and they are wounds to his body that Catholics and the world should overlook. No, we cannot overlook something so evil, when we know it is not the true Church of Jesus Christ. The Catholic church will continue to be the most shameful religious group in the world. When a Catholic comes to see the shame of the Catholic church they will know it is not the true Church Jesus founded.

So, why should a Catholic leave the Catholic church and find the true Church of the Bible?

Because as members of the Catholic church they are in a false church. As a member in the Catholic church they are forced to believe the Catholic church does not have to be found in the Bible. They are forced to believe in many things they cannot find in the Bible.

If a Catholic does not leave the Catholic church they are not baptized properly as found in the Bible. They are not saved by faith as found in the Bible. If they remain Catholic their soul will be lost. If they remain a Catholic after they are shown the Catholic church is not in the Bible they will go to hell.

A Catholic must ask themselves: "If Jesus and the Apostles were not in the Catholic church why should I be a member?"

A Catholic must believe Jesus was the founder of a Jewish Christian Church and Peter preached how to be saved in Acts 2:38.

A Catholic must ask him/her self this question: "If Peter was the first Pope how come the Catholic church does not follow him and baptized in the name of Jesus Christ as Peter preached in Acts 2:38?

Catholics are not dumb people. They do not want their soul to be lost. My final advice to all our Catholic friends is: "don't let anyone fool you or convince you to stay in the Catholic church."

Closing prayer:

Lord Jesus I pray for all the good people in the Catholic church. I pray our Lord that you would open their eyes to see you were not a Catholic and they should not be either. As they open their Bible Lord Jesus and begin to seek for the true Church, guide them, love them, and lead them as our Good Shepherd. Lord I pray now you will bring them into the one fold of the True Church of Jesus Christ. Amen!

Pastor G. Reckart

Return to Studies Page Read Mary Was Not A Catholic

Booklet Print Version PDF Format


TOPICS: Apologetics; History; Ministry/Outreach; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 2,281-2,3002,301-2,3202,321-2,340 ... 2,361-2,378 next last
To: Dr. Eckleburg
Our differences are founded in this very thought. Protestants believe the Holy Spirit speaks directly to individual believers through Scripture and prayer. To read the Bible is to know this for a fact. We're instructed to worship God as a congregation of believers, to study Scripture together and rightly divide the word of God, but we are never to doubt the Holy Spirit is leading our study. It's true that some men think they are being led when they are not. But that does not negate the absolute fact that some men, by the grace and will of God alone, are being led in righteousness to all truth.

I will not question that last statement. I believe it to be true. But I believe that the vast majority of men have so much spiritual static and have so much of their own egos and personal lusts in the way that the Spirit doesn't get through. I have been to many Bible studies both Catholic and non-Catholic; and I've talked with well-meaning non Catholics and it is very obvious that many of them are not being led by the Spirit to their conclusions.

I have had the unfortunate experience of having had a distant relative committed to mental hospital in my home town. While visiting her, I have had the privilege of meeting Jesus Christ (probably a dozen of them), John the Baptist (twice), Napolean, Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and either Marilyn Monroe or Jayne Mansfield. The little voices told them, too.

How can one show that it is the Spirit moving through them, and not demonic voices or internal whims? Even Satan can quote Scripture for his own ends. Answer: the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - the one that Jesus Christ founded. Jesus did not leave Scripture. He left His Church that the gates of Hell will not prevail against.

I do not intend to say that all non Catholics are driven by the Devil; rather that the Devil delights in the creation of multiple churches rather than the One Church and in the private interpretation of Scripture rather than the One Church's teachings. That way, the message is garbled, people can be subtly misled and therefore trapped eternally in Hell. After all, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

2,301 posted on 03/29/2007 3:36:28 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (When you believe in nothing, then everything is acceptable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2280 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr; wmfights
Aren't our priests. They're God's.

Where is the office of the "priest" found in the New Testament??? It's not there, just like holy water and purgatory are not there.

2,302 posted on 03/29/2007 3:36:35 AM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2299 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan

As opposed to the hubris of creating one's own theology?

How is your belief different from what an occupant of the loony bin believes?


2,303 posted on 03/29/2007 3:37:57 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (When you believe in nothing, then everything is acceptable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2283 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr; Uncle Chip
Praying is a Judeo-Christian practice

As Uncle Chip phrases it, the issue is not practice, but origin. Uncle Chip's argument seems to be that because other religions performed ceremonial lustrations before Christians did, therefore the origin sort of has more corrupting mojo, which overpowers the feeble Holy Spirit's (as THEY, not I, seem to say) efforts to redeem.

Then if we were able to find evidence of prayer on the part of people outside the Judeo-Christian tradition would that show that prayer was somehow wrong for us because it was of pagan origin? Well, prayer is mentioned in the Bible, so presumably that certifies that in that case the Holy Spirit is able to handle its use by pagans.

However the Bible has numerous references to water sprinkled with hyssop as a ritual or cultic cleansing rather than merely a practical or sanitary cleansing -- though the distinction back then was not as bold and clear as it is now.

Nevertheless, the use of water for cultic lustration in the Bible does NOT, ah, purge away it's pagan origin, while the use of prayer in the Bible does purge away its cultic origin.

So what other objective difference can we find? Well, the obvious one is that these days the most frequent cultic use of water for ceremonial cleansing is in the Catholic Church. That seems to be the principle and operative difference between lustration and prayer. Both were done first by pagans. Both are in the Bible. But one is not done by Protestants.

So the argument comes down to "Catholics are wrong because they use practices used by Catholics, who, as we all know, are wrong."

Circle the arguments, uh, I mean, wagons!

2,304 posted on 03/29/2007 3:46:33 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Tactical shotty, Marlin 1894c, S&W 686P, Sig 226 & 239, Beretta 92fs & 8357, Glock 22, & attitude!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2298 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
Catholics believe THEY are the only true church. I can't change their opinion but it's just an opinion. God's church is the entire body of believers, not a structure, not a denomination.

Luther, Zwingli and Calvin turned their backs on the Church and set up their own, paving the way for the creation of multiple churches. The mainstream Protestant churches - the Anglican, Presbyterian, Baptist etc. - were also found wanting and thus the American Restoration movement was formed, which created Disciples of Christ, Churches of Christ, Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Seventh-day Adventists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and others.

Now we have the New Testament types who are increasingly independent in forming their own theologies.

All completely independent from each other. All differing either slightly or grossly from each other. The Church that Jesus left on earth had the authority to ensure doctrinal purity. Acts and the Epistles document extensively the authority that the Apostles and the early Church officials had to deal with the individual church communities across the known world in correcting, instructing, admonishing and directing them.

There is no independence in God's church. It's not the rules of the individual. It's His rules. We cannot make it up as we go along.

2,305 posted on 03/29/2007 3:50:01 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (When you believe in nothing, then everything is acceptable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2285 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
Where is the office of the "priest" found in the New Testament??? It's not there, just like holy water and purgatory are not there.

So? Round and round we go! You guys think that the promise of Christ to his Church expired sometime between, say 65 A.D. and 110 A.D. We don't. And yet you say WE don't trust Christ, and exchange high fives as you declare that someting we do isn't in Scripture. I don't see ice cream socials and churches with indoor pools, or even pulpits in Scripture, but my knickers remain in their original and comfortable untwisted condition. (Well, maybe pulpits ...)

I see no way to settle this. We continually and openly talk about a development, refinement, adumbration, and all like that there of doctrine beyond the seminal declarations of Scripture. Then y'all rear back, gasping in shocked outrage, and declare that after much research you have discovered that we do exactly what we say we do! Well bust my buttons!

Yep. We trust in God's guidance of the extremely sinful, froward, wayward, "perverse and foolish", etc. people redeemed in and through the ministrations of his Church. We are guilty as charged, and we throw ourselves on the mercy of the Father, but not of the Protestants.

Haul out your analytical concordance and check out presbyteros. We would say that, yes, there was some definition and distinction between presbyter and bishop, and a development and articulation of their roles and of the relationship of those roles to the hieratic ministry of our Lord. If you do another word study on apostolos then it is not beyond reason that there would be a kind of sharing of hieratic ministry with the elders of the Church.

I fear that was too muddy, but I did my best.

2,306 posted on 03/29/2007 4:02:07 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Tactical shotty, Marlin 1894c, S&W 686P, Sig 226 & 239, Beretta 92fs & 8357, Glock 22, & attitude!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2302 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
Where is the office of the "priest" found in the New Testament??? Oh yes, that's right. You have an abridged Bible that has completely eliminated the Old Testament. I'd be interested in knowing what portions of the New have been lopped off in your version of Scripture. That's really taking Martin Luther's sins further. He also formed his own doctrine and cut out the Bible passages that he didn't agree with. Priest. The word derives ultimately from the Greek presbuteros meaning "elder," along with the term bishop (episkopos). We see the priesthood as both a reflection of the ancient Temple priesthood of the Jews and the person of Jesus. The liturgy of ordination recalls the Old Testament priesthood and the priesthood of Christ. In the words of Thomas Aquinas, "Christ is the source of all priesthood: the priest of the old law was a prefiguration of Christ, and the priest of the new law acts in the person of Christ." Oh, but that's right. The Old Testament is the merest printed trash, not fit to wrap fish, and because it differs from your perspective, in this case Thomas Aquinas is either a doddering fool, or an evil con man.
2,307 posted on 03/29/2007 4:04:48 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (When you believe in nothing, then everything is acceptable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2302 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg; Uncle Chip

You must remember, sir, that Uncle Chip has an extremely abridged Bible. It is beyond his acceptance that we use the portions of the Bible that he doesn't use.

Also remember that he rejects Jesus' divine nature whilst on Earth. He has not yet replied to my direct questions, but from what I gather, he believes that Jesus was only human on earth, but has been resurrected into a god-like state. As will be all those who are resurrected. Sounds like LDS beliefs to me.

But he has not referred to the Book of Mormon yet. I'm still trying to understand what he believes Sacred Scripture to be. And what it's composed of.


2,308 posted on 03/29/2007 4:11:44 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (When you believe in nothing, then everything is acceptable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2304 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg
However the Bible has numerous references to water sprinkled with hyssop as a ritual or cultic cleansing

Is the water sprinkled with the hyssop or is the blood or blood diluted with water sprinkled with the hyssop?

2,309 posted on 03/29/2007 4:15:41 AM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2304 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
But it is true. There is not one place in scripture where Jesus or the apostles or anyone created a gallon or even a drop of "Holy Water".

But it is true of the early Church.

2,310 posted on 03/29/2007 4:19:32 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (When you believe in nothing, then everything is acceptable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2300 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
Is the water sprinkled with the hyssop or is the blood or blood diluted with water sprinkled with the hyssop?

What's your answer to your question? And if you have an answer, why ask me?

It seems in one reference that blood is involved, though whether it's blood diluted with water or water with blood in it - in other words the ratio of blood to water - is not clear. In another reference it seems that the ashes of the sacrifice and some other stuff (red yarn) are involved.

I maintain that the argumentative circularity, which is my main point, applies in either case.

2,311 posted on 03/29/2007 4:32:30 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Tactical shotty, Marlin 1894c, S&W 686P, Sig 226 & 239, Beretta 92fs & 8357, Glock 22, & attitude!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2309 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
But it is true of the early Church.

Oh really?? Here is what the link at #2188 says. Note the qualifying words in bold[mine]. I just love the game these apologists play. They make a statement and then take it away. It's called a qualified lie:

"The use of holy water in Catholic Churches goes back possibly to Apostolic times. There is a tradition that St. Matthew recommended it in order thereby to attract converts from Judaism by using a rite with which they were familiar in their former faith. However, we have no certainty that he introduced it, but we know that it can be traced back nearly to the beginning of our religion. It is mentioned in a letter ascribed by some to Pope Alexander I, and supposed to have been written in the year 117; but the genuineness of this letter is very doubtful.... We find a detailed account of its use, however, in the "Pontifical of Serapion," in the fourth century, and the formula of blessing mentioned therein has considerable resemblance to that used at the present day.... "The Asperges. The blessing of water [at] Mass on Sunday and the sprinkling of the congregation with it, which ceremony is called the "Asperges," goes back to the time of Pope Leo IV, in the ninth century, and possibly even further. "

So there is no evidence that it was used until the 4th century at the earliest and possibly not until the 9th century. So when you say "the early church", you must mean the early Roman Catholic Church which was founded in the 4th century and took shape over the next few centuries.

2,312 posted on 03/29/2007 4:57:15 AM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2310 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr; Mad Dawg
You must remember, sir, that Uncle Chip has an extremely abridged Bible. It is beyond his acceptance that we use the portions of the Bible that he doesn't use. Also remember that he rejects Jesus' divine nature whilst on Earth. He has not yet replied to my direct questions, but from what I gather, he believes that Jesus was only human on earth, but has been resurrected into a god-like state. As will be all those who are resurrected. Sounds like LDS beliefs to me. But he has not referred to the Book of Mormon yet. I'm still trying to understand what he believes Sacred Scripture to be. And what it's composed of.

Clearly you have me confused with someone else. I will accept your apology should you choose to post it.

2,313 posted on 03/29/2007 4:59:57 AM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2308 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Golly, for you guys that's overwhelming evidence!


2,314 posted on 03/29/2007 5:14:56 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Tactical shotty, Marlin 1894c, S&W 686P, Sig 226 & 239, Beretta 92fs & 8357, Glock 22, & attitude!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2312 | View Replies]

To: MarkBsnr
We cannot make it up as we go along.

But that's exactly what you do...Praying to Mary...Holy Water...Apparitions...Purgatory...Limbo...

Your church is based on tons of things that aren't scriptural...Then you call it 'tradition' which you say supercedes the word of God...

We did not become Christians because of your church...We are Christians because we ultimately heard the word of God from the bible...And it doesn't come any where near resembling your religion...We becaume Christians without your tradition...

You appear to claim that the Holy Spitit does not lead individuals to truth...Only your 'holy priesthood' is taught truth by the Holy Spirit...And it doesn't come from the bible...Is that an admission that the Holy Spirit does not dwell within you??? How do you know that it's not Satan leading your Magisterium??? Fact is, you don't...

2,315 posted on 03/29/2007 5:35:10 AM PDT by Iscool (There will be NO peace on earth, NOR good will toward men UNTIL there is Glory to God in the Highest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2305 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

9th century?

No, the article says that "We find a detailed account of its use, however, in the "Pontifical of Serapion," in the fourth century, and the formula of blessing mentioned therein has considerable resemblance to that used at the present day." A detailed account of its use. That means that it was already in wide practice at this point in time.

Now, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07432a.htm says that:

The use of holy water in the earliest days of the Christian Era is attested by documents of only comparatively late date. The "Apostolic Constitutions", the redaction of which goes back to about the year 400, attribute to the Apostle St. Matthew the precept of using holy water. The letter written under the name of Pope Alexander I, who lived in the second century, is apocryphal and of more recent times; hence the first historical testimony does not go back beyond the fifth century.

and

The use of holy water in the earliest days of the Christian Era is attested by documents of only comparatively late date. The "Apostolic Constitutions", the redaction of which goes back to about the year 400, attribute to the Apostle St. Matthew the precept of using holy water. The letter written under the name of Pope Alexander I, who lived in the second century, is apocryphal and of more recent times; hence the first historical testimony does not go back beyond the fifth century.

and

As early as the fourth century various writings, the authenticity of which is free from suspicion, mention the use of water sanctified either by the liturgical blessing just referred to, or by the individual blessing of some holy person. St. Epiphanius (Contra haeres., lib. I, haer. xxx) records that at Tiberias a man named Joseph poured water on a madman, having first made the sign of the cross and pronounced these words over the water: "In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, crucified, depart from this unhappy one, thou infernal spirit, and let him be healed!" Joseph was converted an subsequently used the same proceeding to overcome witchcraft; yet, he was neither a bishop nor a cleric. Theodoret (Hist. eccl., V, xxi) relates that Marcellus, Bishop of Apamea, sanctified water by the sign of the cross and that Aphraates cured one of the emperor's horses by making it drink water blessed by the sign of the cross ("Hist. relig.", c. viii, in P.G., LXXXII, col. 1244, 1375). In the West similar attestations are made. Gregory of Tours (De gloria confess., c. 82) tells of a recluse named Eusitius who lived in the sixth century and possessed the power of curing quartan fever by giving its victims to drink of water that he had blessed; we might mention many other instances treasured up by this same Gregory ("De Miraculis S. Martini", II, xxxix; "Mirac. S. Juliani", II, iii, xxv, xxvi; "Liber de Passione S. Juliani"; "Vitae Patrum", c. iv, n. 3). It is known that some of the faithful believed that holy water possessed curative properties for certain diseases, and that this was true in a special manner of baptismal water. In some places it was carefully preserved throughout the year and, by reason of its having been used in baptism, was considered free from all corruption. This belief spread from East to West; and scarcely had baptism been administered, when the people would crown around with all sorts of vessels and take away the water, some keeping it carefully in their homes whilst others watered their fields, vineyards, and gardens with it ("Ordo rom. I", 42, in "Mus. ital.", II, 26).

However, baptismal water was not the only holy water. Some was permanently retained at the entrance to Christian churches where a clerk sprinkled the faithful as they came in and, for this reason, was called hydrokometes or "introducer by water", an appellation that appears in the superscription of a letter of Synesius in which allusion is made to "lustral water placed in the vestibule of the temple". This water was perhaps blessed in proportion as it was needed, and the custom of the Church may have varied on this point. Balsamon tells us that, in the Greek Church, they "made" holy water at the beginning of each lunar month. It is quite possible that, according to canon 65 of the Council of Constantinople held in 691, this rite was established for the purpose of definitively supplanting the pagan feast of the new moon and causing it to pass into oblivion. In the West Dom Martène declares that nothing was found prior to the ninth century concerning the blessing and aspersion of water that takes place every Sunday at Mass. At that time Pope Leo IV ordered that each priest bless water every Sunday in his own church and sprinkle the people with it: "Omni die Dominico, ante missam, aquam benedictam facite, unde populus et loca fidelium aspergantur" (P.L., CXV, col. 679). Hincmar of Reims gave directions as follows: "Every Sunday, before the celebration of Mass, the priest shall bless water in his church, and, for this holy purpose, he shall use a clean and suitable vessel. The people, when entering the church, are to be sprinkled with this water, and those who so desire may carry some away in clean vessels so as to sprinkle their houses, fields, vineyards, and cattle, and the provender with which these last are fed, as also to throw over their own food" ("Capitula synodalia", cap. v, in P.L., CXXV, col, 774). The rule of having water blessed for the aspersion at Mass on Sunday was thenceforth generally followed, but the exact time set by Leo IV and Hincmar was not everywhere observed. At Tours, the blessing took place on Saturday before Vespers; at Cambrai and at Aras, it was to be given without ceremony in the sacristy before the recitation of the hour of Prime; at Albi, in the fifteenth century, the ceremony was conducted in the sacristy before Terce; and at Soissons, on the highest of the sanctuary steps, before Terce; whereas at Laon and Senlis, in the fourteenth century, it took place in the choir before the hour of Terce. There are two Sundays on which water is not and seems never to be blessed: these are Easter Sunday and Pentecost. The reason is because on the eve of these two feasts water for the baptismal fonts is blessed and consecrated and, before its mixture with the holy chrism, the faithful are allowed to take some of it to their homes, and keep it for use in time of need.

------

It isn't a game. It's real and serious. I don't understand why you would play chicken with your soul taking the stances that you do.


2,316 posted on 03/29/2007 5:37:09 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (When you believe in nothing, then everything is acceptable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2312 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

We rely on the Church that Jesus Christ founded. It is the Pillar of Truth. Jesus himself says to go to the Church. The Church guides, admonishes, teaches and is the hands of God here on Earth.

It has the authority to do His will. Remember the story of the eunuch attempting to read Scripture. At least the eunuch had the sense to accept the guidance of one authorized to teach. I see a lot of eunuchs that are missing that sense.


2,317 posted on 03/29/2007 5:44:24 AM PDT by MarkBsnr (When you believe in nothing, then everything is acceptable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2315 | View Replies]

Comment #2,318 Removed by Moderator

To: Iscool
You appear to claim that the Holy Spitit does not lead individuals to truth...Only your 'holy priesthood' is taught truth by the Holy Spirit...And it doesn't come from the bible...Is that an admission that the Holy Spirit does not dwell within you??? How do you know that it's not Satan leading your Magisterium??? Fact is, you don't...

"Holy Spitit" indeed!
I don't get how you guys claim the leadership of the Holy Spirit when basic reasoning is so infrequently used by you all. There is a disticntion between gifts of the Spirit and the Spirit Himself.

I've said it numerous times on this thread and have yet to see it addressed. The Bible (it's an interesting book, you may have heard of it) quite clearly states that not everyone has all the gifts of the Spirit, but gifts are spread around, with one person having this gift and another not having this gift but having that gift.

Consequently there is no connection whatsoever between acknowledging that somebody else has gifts having to do with discernment and teaching and saying that I have no portion of the Holy Spirit. Paul distinguishes between gifts and the Spirit which gives them. YOU all are disagreeing with Paul, as it seems to me, not us.

And of course there's the problem , and it's just a problem, I'm not claiming to have a devastating rejoinder here, of how people became Christians before there was a Bible? But we've been over that so many times.

We becaume Christians without your tradition...

The Bible itself is a tradition of the Church. I know you don't agree, I've read the articulations of the opposing viewpoints. None of them persuade.

But at least you make as clear as can be that the real defining and motivating principle for many (by no means for all) Protestants is nothing other than hatred of the catholic church. You claim a Spirit of Truth but then put up the ludicrous article which charges us with teaching what we do not teach. Any stick, -- the stick doesn't even have to exist -- ANY stick will do. Don't you see that as long as you support this article, you cannot be considered a source of anything reliable?

2,319 posted on 03/29/2007 5:53:00 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Tactical shotty, Marlin 1894c, S&W 686P, Sig 226 & 239, Beretta 92fs & 8357, Glock 22, & attitude!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2315 | View Replies]

To: Religion Moderator

My fingers stuttered. Please crunch #2319? Thanks.


2,320 posted on 03/29/2007 5:54:06 AM PDT by Mad Dawg (Tactical shotty, Marlin 1894c, S&W 686P, Sig 226 & 239, Beretta 92fs & 8357, Glock 22, & attitude!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2318 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 2,281-2,3002,301-2,3202,321-2,340 ... 2,361-2,378 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson