Conclusion from Peru and Mexico

ESV Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

In recent days I have spent time in Lima and Sullana Peru and Mexico City and I have discovered that people by nature are the same. Man has a heart that is inclined to selfishness and idolatry. Sin abounds in the remotest parts of the land because the heart is desperately wicked. Thousands bow before statues of Mary and pray to her hoping for answers. I have seen these people stare hopelessly at Mary icons, Jesus icons, and a host of dead saints who will do nothing for them. I have talked with people who pray to the pope and say that they love him. I talked with one lady who said that she knew that Jesus was the Savior, but she loved the pope. Thousands bow before Santa Muerte (holy death angel) in hopes that she will do whatever they ask her. I have seen people bring money, burning cigarettes, beer, whiskey, chocolate, plants, and flowers to Santa Muerte in hopes of her answers. I have seen these people bowing on their knees on the concrete in the middle of public places to worship their idol. Millions of people come into the Basilica in Mexico City and pay their money, confess their sins, and stare hopelessly at relics in hope that their sins will be pardoned. In America countless thousands are chained to baseball games, football games, material possessions, and whatever else their heart of idols can produce to worship.

My heart has broken in these last weeks because the God of heaven is not honored as he ought to be honored. People worship the things that are created rather than worshiping the Creator. God has been gracious to all mankind and yet mankind has hardened their hearts against a loving God. God brings the rain on the just and unjust. God brings the beautiful sunrises and sunsets upon the just and unjust. God gives good gifts unto all and above all things he has given his Son that those who would believe in him would be saved. However, man has taken the good things of God and perverted them unto idols and turned their attention away from God. I get a feel for Jesus as he overlooked Jerusalem or Paul as he beseeched for God to save Israel. When you accept the reality of the truth of the glory of God is breaks your heart that people would turn away from the great and awesome God of heaven to serve lesser things. Moses was outraged by the golden calf, the prophets passionately preached against idolatry, Jesus was angered that the temple was changed in an idolatrous business, and Paul preached to the idolaters of Mars Hill by telling them of the unknown God.

I arrived back at home wondering how I should respond to all the idolatry that I have beheld in these last three weeks. I wondered how our church here in the states should respond to all of the idolatry in the world. What are the options? First, I suppose we could sit around and hope that people chose to get their life together and stop being idolaters. However, I do not know how that could ever happen apart from them hearing the truth. Second, I suppose we could spend a lifetime studying cultural issues and customs in hope that we could somehow learn to relate to the people of other countries. However, the bible is quite clear that all men are the same. Men are dead in sin, shaped in iniquity, and by nature are the enemies of God. Thirdly, we could pay other people or other agencies to go and do a work for us while we remain comfortably in the states. However, there is no way to insure that there will be doctrinal accuracy or integrity. If we only pay other people to take the gospel we will miss out on all of the benefits of being obedient to the mission of God. Lastly, we could seek where God would have us to do a lasting work and then invest our lives there for the glory of God. The gospel has the power to raise the dead in any culture and we must be willing to take the gospel wherever God would have us take it. It is for sure that our church cannot go to every country and reach every people group, so we must determine where God would have us work and seek to be obedient wherever that is.

It seems that some doors are opening in the Spanish speaking countries below us and perhaps God is beginning to reveal where we are to work. There are some options for work to be partnered with in Peru and there could be a couple of options in Mexico. The need is greater than I can express upon this paper for a biblical gospel to be proclaimed in Peru and Mexico. Oh, that God would glorify his great name in Peru and Mexico by using a small little church in a town that does not exist to proclaim his great gospel amongst a people who desperately need the truth.

I give thanks to the LORD for allowing me the privilege of going to these countries and broadening my horizons. The things that I have seen will be forever engraved upon my heart. I will long remember the pastors that I spent time with in Peru and I will never forget Adolfo who translated for me in Mexico. I will relish the time that I spent with Paul Washer and the others. When I think of church I will forever remember being on top of that mountain in Sullana at that church which had no electricity and no roof. I am convinced that heaven was looking down on that little church on top of that mountain and very few people on earth even know that it exist. Oh, God I pray that the things of this world will continue to grow dim and that God’s people will be caught up in his glorious presence.

Because of the truth: Pastor: J. Randall Easter II Timothy 2:19 "Our God is in heaven and does whatever He pleases."(Ps. 115:3) "He predestined us according to the good pleasure of His will."(Eph. 1:5) Those who have been saved have been saved for His glory and they are being made holy for this is the will of God. Are you being made holy? Spurgeon says, "If your religion does not make you holy it will damn you to hell."

There’s many good sources of information about the unbiblical view of Mary held by the RCC. Here’s a extract from one:

My sources for this section are the Bible and the “Catechism of the Catholic Church,” which has numbered paragraphs. For the sake of simplicity and brevity, I will just say “Catechism” plus the number of the paragraph(s). For example, “’Catechism’ 411, 493” means “’Catechism of the Catholic Church,’ paragraphs numbered 411 and 493”.

For each doctrinal category, I will indicate the Catholic doctrine, followed by the appropriate references from the “Catechism”. I will follow this with quotations from the Bible which relate to the doctrine. The last book in the Bible is called “The Book of Revelation” in Protestant Bibles and “The Apocalypse” in Catholic Bibles. I will refer to it as “Revelation”.

IMMACULATE CONCEPTION — Mary was preserved from all stain of original sin from the first instant of her conception. (”Catechism” 490-492).

In Luke 1:46-47, Mary said: “My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour”. Mary knew that she needed a savior.

The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was first introduced by a heretic (a man whose teachings were officially declared to be contrary to Church doctrine). For centuries this doctrine was unanimously rejected by popes, Fathers and theologians of the Catholic Church. (Note 13)

ALL-HOLY — Mary, “the All-Holy,” lived a perfectly sinless life. (”Catechism” 411, 493)

Romans 3:23 says “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God”. Revelation 15:4 says, “Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name? For thou only art holy”. Romans 3:10 says, “There is none righteous, no, not one”.

Jesus is the only person who is referred to in Scripture as sinless. Hebrews 4:15 says, “For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feelings of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.” 2 Corinthians 5:21 says, “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” 1 Peter 2:22 says, “Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth”.

In contrast, Mary said that God is her Savior. (Luke 1:47) If God was her Savior, then Mary was not sinless. Sinless people do not need a Savior.

In the Book of Revelation, when they were searching for someone who was worthy to break the seals and open the scroll, the only person who was found to be worthy was Jesus. Nobody else in Heaven or on earth (including Mary) was worthy to open the scroll or even look inside it. (Revelation 5:1-5)

PERPETUAL VIRGINITY — Mary was a virgin before, during and after the birth of Christ. (”Catechism” 496-511)

Matthew 1:24-25 says, “Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.” “Till” (until) means that after that point, Joseph did “know” (have sexual relations with) Mary. (See Genesis 4:1 where Adam “knew” Eve and she conceived and had a son.)

Jesus had brothers and sisters. The Bible even tells us their names. Matthew 13:54-56 says, “

And when he was come into his own country, he taught them in their synagogue, insomuch that they were astonished, and said, Whence hatch this man this wisdom, and these mighty works? Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us?”

Other Scripture verses which specifically refer to Jesus’ brothers are: Matthew 12:46; John 2:12; John 7:3; Acts 1:14; and Galatians 1:19.

I was always taught that “brothers” and “sisters” were general terms that really could refer to any kind of kinsman, including cousins. This is true in the Hebrew language. However, the New Testament is written in Greek, which is an extremely precise language. It makes a clear distinction between the words used to describe family relationships. There is a Greek word which refers to people who are relatives but not of the immediate family, such as aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces and cousins. There are other Greek words which refer specifically to a person’s brother or sister within a family. (Note 14)

MOTHER OF GOD — Because she is the mother of Jesus, and Jesus is God, therefore Mary is the Mother of God. (”Catechism” 963, 971, 2677).

The Incarnation means that Jesus was both fully God and fully man. Mary was only the mother of Jesus as man, and not the mother of Jesus as God. According to the Bible, the world was created through Jesus. This was long before Mary was born. Hebrews 1:1-2 says,

“God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds”.

Colossians 1:16-17 says,

“For by him [Jesus] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things [including Mary] were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things [including Mary] , and by him all things consist”.

John 8:58 says, “Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was, I am.” Jesus existed before Abraham was born. That means that He also existed before Mary was born. In John 17:5, Jesus says, “And now O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.” So Jesus existed even before the world began. Jesus came first — not Mary.

13. William Webster, “The Church of Rome at the Bar of History,” pages 72-77.

14. William Webster, pages 79-80.

I agree, but I think HD was referring to our doctrinal differences. Again, our doctrinal differences are not differences of belief but of definition. It is not that we believe in that Mary in not immaculate, but how she got to be that way; we do not deny the original sin, but what it means. There are ecclesial differences that are not doctrinal, such as the extent of papal jurisdiction (something actively discussed by both particular Churches as we write).

Correct kosta. To the Orthodox the idea of the infalibility of the Pope would be ecclesial. Thus the bishops and cardinals have given the Pope that right. Orthodoxs do not agree that the Pope has that right, certainly not to rule over them, and they see this strictly as an ecclesial issue.

Protestants believe Catholics issue the infallibility issue as a doctrinal statement and they specifically lay out a case for this in Vatican 1. Catholics have gone on record as saying the infalibility of the Pope comes directly from God-not bishops and cardinals and use the traditions of the Church to support their view (even referring to the Greek Church). Consequently Protestants view the statement from the Church as laid out in Vatican 1 not as ecclesical in nature but doctrinal. I would call your attention to Vatican 1:

Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith, to the glory of God our savior, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion and for the salvation of the Christian people, with the approval of the Sacred Council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable. Vatican 1

Seeing some of the new doctrines coming from the Pope about Mary, I am sure the Orthodoxs do not look at this as infallible. While Orthodox would simply roll their eyes and yawn, Protestants see this as a rather significant boo-boo. I would suggest the Orthodox normally give the Catholics far greater leyway then Protestants.

So I guess our question for our friend MarkBsnr is whether he considers Vatican 1 with respect to the infallibility of the Pope, ecclesial in nature and subject to change or if he considers it doctrine unable to be changed.

I don't get the connection. Nobody is disputing that there have been some horrendous things done by Catholics in the past.

I am interested in the phenomenon of the people who complain of such misdeeds turning around and doing the same thing, AND, especially, in the way people use what they claim is an evangelical call or duty or some-such to intentionally provoke and insult others, and also to be content with attacking some lie about the people they disparage rather than addressing the truth.

To develop the last point, there are ample opportunities, some even in FR, to find out the real notion that Catholics have about Church and denomination, and about, say, the necessity (if any) of Baptism, and a lot of other things.

But what I frequently see is people insisting that I believe what I do not in fact believe, and that I do what I do not do, and then attacking me for it and seeming to choose to be impervious to any new information about Catholic Faith and Practice.

And then this is justified, as it seems, by a claimed similarity to a paternal beating given to a wayward son.

I am interested in communication. So I am always interested when people want to engage in verbal exchanges but seem not to want to communicate. Abuses in Church related schools (the antisemitism I saw at one sort of vaguely New England Congregationalist/Unitarian prep school would curl your hair!) is a grave evil. I just don't find it an interesting evil.

well evil is evil, whether interesting to you or not.

Questioning the doctrines of so-called Christian churches is not abuse and when I am told (all the time by the way, what I believe) I don't consider it such. Some of the most intense debating here sometimes goes on between believers of the same denominations. Quoting the bible in defense is "iron sharpening iron", not abuse and is healthy and a way of learning. Getting threads closed or shut-down because someone doesn't like what is posted, is very childish, in my opinion.

Attributing sadistic motives to long-time, and respected posters, especially those who feel they are called to preach the Word, and whom we do not know personally, is in itself highly suspicious of a defect in one's own personality, wouldn't you agree?

Spending too much time online probably can't be constructive to one's physical and mental health anyway, as it might lead to an obsession of sorts. Some people might tend to take some matters a little too seriously. One thing about online posting that I do know from experience, one's posts that they themselves care so much about and are so invested in, can be not even read and quickly dismissed and forgotten.

However, God has promised that when He sends out His Word, it does not return empty-handed. The posters who cite scripture so faithfully and repeatedly, which does tend to antagonize others for reasons we are aware of, are not doing it to abuse anyone, but using it instead of their own opinions and words in fruitful debate.

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.