Setting the Record Striaght

[mclees8]

Setting the record Straight

Satan is the great deceiver . I once wrote a small book or booklet  I was led to call “The Counterfeit“. Because Satan from the beginning of the church has sought to destroy and misguide The Lords church by deception, confusion, and  producing a counterfeit of Christ church. It is a nature of men to fall into apostasy. It is nothing new because apostasy was part of the sin nature as far back as the fall of man.  

First lets understand how apostasy works. We just don’t wake up one day and commit apostasy. It starts out seemingly innocent and harmless, but with time  it will completely change the whole concept of what was first taught.  It is in full blossom when the church returns to worldliness  being guided of men and mans wisdom and carnal instincts Lets look at deception, which is nothing more than a lie that poses as the truth. Confusion is misunderstanding the facts. Which distorts and misleads the truth.  
All  this surrounds this word catholic which the RCC papacy uses to confuse and hold captive the church and even the world  at large. Lets look at when this word was first used. First there is no evidence that this word was used for the church before Ignatius used it in 110 AD. It was just a term that caught on and stuck.  So this word was a term he chose to use to describe those who were the church and were of one universal faith in Christ. It was meant to include all who confessed Jesus as Lord. There were no divisions of the faith. Even though there were some who tried to bring division. There was a vast difference from the church of 110 AD and what the Roman catholic church became in 500AD. First the church was not Roman catholic in 110 AD.  Ignatius  was speaking of all believers which by the true meaning of the word is still all believers today. No Protestant or RCC division.. The papacy made the word synonymous with the Roman catholic church saying the church has always been Catholic, but what they really mean is that the church was always Roman Catholic It was a power and authority issue.  Nothing could be further from the truth. This is the deception that they use to confuse the church into believing the church was always the Roman Catholic papal system and the church that Jesus founded This is deception in capitals and keeps the  people  captive to a false idea that the  self imposed papal authority represents Christ true church. It stopped being Christ True church when the bishops of Rome became drunk with the ideal of being the religious political law of the land, and the center of all Christendom.

The next deception is the true church Christ founded was not political and never was supposed to become a political ambition. Jesus himself rejected this in the temptations of
Satan. What did Satan offer? He said I will give you the whole world if you will worship me . Of course Jesus rejected quickly that we must serve God and Him only. Think about it, Jesus could ruled the world. He would not have had to suffer the cross, but it  was not the Father’s purpose or will. Neither did Jesus ever teach that the church was to dominate or seek to dominate the world religiously or politically  Salvation is not adherence to a religious political authority.. When they became the supreme authority of the land they said salvation could only be achieved through adherence to the papacy. It was not an issue of personal faith anymore. It was forced religion and intimidation that played upon ignorance and fear of losing one’s  salvation by excommunication. or Anathema . Neither Jesus or Peter ever would have been party to this. Christ was presented up front but the real truth was they robbed Jesus seat and falsely claimed to sit in on the throne of Peter. Not to mention Peter would never sit on any throne like any pope. They were in bed with the world and its kings This ambition was worldly and carnal, and is the very reason this church is referred to as the Harlot in Revelation 17.  

The next deception was they said there was no salvation out side the church which is true except they did not truly represent the church because they institutionalized it. They made the church a thing, a hierarchy centered on the idea of authority and leadership. They became an exalted clergy with religious vestments and titles They were the church and there was no true laity because the clergy was exalted above the people who were not saved by personal confession but forced to observance of the Mass and the rituals of the Eucharist. One is not saved by mere observances. .Those who truly confess Jesus from the heart inter into the church by faith, not forced observances. This of course was before the Reformation. But the politics of this world and the exaltation of the clergy is still very much alive. After the reformation the exalted clergy system was still used by Protestant churches.  This gives the mistaken idea that we are going to church instead of being the church.    

God bless



     .  

        

[banished]

Hello mclees8,

Thanks for another great write up.  Yes, the quicksands of deception and the toils of ever deeping matter have been with the church since day one.  But for some reason you didn't mention the fact that the Holy Eucharist has been with the Roman Catholic Church from the begining also. Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist at the Last Supper, the night before He died, and after he have given the Keys to Peter.  You always forget to include those facts in your writings.  Try to remember The whole Christ is really, truly, and substantially present in the Holy Eucharist. Here is historical documents from the early church fathers:

St. Ignatius Bishop of Antioch 1st Century writes:

 

(quote)
The heretics confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ which suffered for our sins.  And, which the Father in his goodness raised up again. Take heed then to have but one Eucharist for there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ.

                                            -St. Ignatius of Antioch
(End of quote)

 

A 2nd Century Bishop writes:

 

(quote)
How can they say that the flesh which is nourished with the body of the Lord and with his blood passes into corruption?"
         
               -Irenaeus, 2nd Century
(end of quote)

 

Now Justin Martry, early 2nd Century, a great defender of the Catholic Faith:

 

(quote)
We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it except the one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the remission of sins, Since Jesus Christ, our Savior, was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood so too we have been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharist prayer.  And set down by him and by the change of which our blood and flesh in nourished, is both the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus.

              -Justin Martyr, early 2nd Century
(end of quote)


 

[mclees8]

Hello mclees8,

Thanks for another great write up.  Yes, the quicksands of deception and the toils of ever deeping matter have been with the church since day one.  But for some reason you didn't mention the fact that the Holy Eucharist has been with the Roman Catholic Church from the begining also. Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist at the Last Supper, the night before He died, and after he have given the Keys to Peter.  You always forget to include those facts in your writings.  Try to remember The whole Christ is really, truly, and substantially present in the Holy Eucharist. Here is historical documents from the early church fathers:

St. Ignatius Bishop of Antioch 1st Century writes:

 

(quote)
The heretics confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ which suffered for our sins.  And, which the Father in his goodness raised up again. Take heed then to have but one Eucharist for there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ.

                                            -St. Ignatius of Antioch
(End of quote)

 

A 2nd Century Bishop writes:

 

(quote)
How can they say that the flesh which is nourished with the body of the Lord and with his blood passes into corruption?"
         
               -Irenaeus, 2nd Century
(end of quote)

 

Now Justin Martry, early 2nd Century, a great defender of the Catholic Faith:

 

(quote)
We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it except the one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the remission of sins, Since Jesus Christ, our Savior, was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood so too we have been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharist prayer.  And set down by him and by the change of which our blood and flesh in nourished, is both the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus.

              -Justin Martyr, early 2nd Century
(end of quote)


 

I would not want to take anything away from what Jesus instituted as a remembrance of Him. The subject was about deception Not the Eucharist. Yet Eucharist is not a word I find in scripture. Perhaps since you think it so important a subject maybe you could give some history about the word and tell us how we got the word Eucharist and when it was first applied. Also When they instilled all the hocus pokus about Transubstantiation. There will always be conlfict about this subject. I already know the argument so it will not serve to go on and on about it.       

God bless

[Amo]

During the Middle Ages a more elaborate doctrine of the Eucharist was developed by Scholastic philosophers under the influence of Aristotle (see Scholasticism). Aristotle taught that earthly things possessed accidents (size, shape, color, texture) perceptible to the senses, and substance, their essential reality, known by the mind. According to Scholastic speculation, the substance of the Eucharistic bread is, by the power of God, wholly transformed into the body of Christ. This view of the presence of Christ, called transubstantiation, was most elaborately formulated by the 13th-century Italian theologian St. Thomas Aquinas. It has been the official teaching of the Roman Catholic church since the Middle Ages, although the Council of Trent, which reasserted the doctrine against the Protestant reformers in the 16th century, did not include any philosophical speculation in its statement, asserting simply that an actual change occurred in the bread and wine.( Encarta97 Enc. )

[banished]

Hello mclees8,

Thanks for another great write up.  Yes, the quicksands of deception and the toils of ever deeping matter have been with the church since day one.  But for some reason you didn't mention the fact that the Holy Eucharist has been with the Roman Catholic Church from the begining also. Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist at the Last Supper, the night before He died, and after he have given the Keys to Peter.  You always forget to include those facts in your writings.  Try to remember The whole Christ is really, truly, and substantially present in the Holy Eucharist. Here is historical documents from the early church fathers:

St. Ignatius Bishop of Antioch 1st Century writes:

  

(quote)
The heretics confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ which suffered for our sins.  And, which the Father in his goodness raised up again. Take heed then to have but one Eucharist for there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ.

                                            -St. Ignatius of Antioch
(End of quote)

 

A 2nd Century Bishop writes:

 

(quote)
How can they say that the flesh which is nourished with the body of the Lord and with his blood passes into corruption?"
          
               -Irenaeus, 2nd Century
(end of quote)

 

Now Justin Martry, early 2nd Century, a great defender of the Catholic Faith:

 

(quote)
We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it except the one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the remission of sins, Since Jesus Christ, our Savior, was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood so too we have been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharist prayer.  And set down by him and by the change of which our blood and flesh in nourished, is both the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus.

              -Justin Martyr, early 2nd Century
(end of quote)


 

I would not want to take anything away from what Jesus instituted as a remembrance of Him. The subject was about deception Not the Eucharist. Yet Eucharist is not a word I find in scripture. Perhaps since you think it so important a subject maybe you could give some history about the word and tell us how we got the word Eucharist and when it was first applied. Also When they instilled all the hocus pokus about Transubstantiation. There will always be conlfict about this subject. I already know the argument so it will not serve to go on and on about it.      

God bless

I'm just an excommunicated Catholic layman with a laptop computer, but that's an easy question to answer.  In John 6:53-56 Jesus declares the Eucharist to be his body, and later some Bishop the Roman Catholic Church invented the word Transubstantiation which condenses that whole verse into one word.

"Jesus therefore said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him." (John 6:53-56)

On both sides of the Transubstantiation Argument there are people who have earned a PhD, and still can't understand the fact that it's an act of Faith.  All you have to do to prove that Eternal life comes from belief and not the actual eating of the Eucharist is to substitute the word Eucharist for bread in John 6.

I still think that we need to open a "New Age Section" on this forum.  What you have been saying is pretty much in agreement with what Neale Walsch have been saying. Walsch's vision is an unification of all present theologies to render them more relevant to our present day and time.  Why look back at the history of the Catholics and suffer when you can look forward with Walsch and be happy? Just trying to help.

 

[mclees8]

Hello mclees8,

Thanks for another great write up.  Yes, the quicksands of deception and the toils of ever deeping matter have been with the church since day one.  But for some reason you didn't mention the fact that the Holy Eucharist has been with the Roman Catholic Church from the begining also. Christ instituted the Holy Eucharist at the Last Supper, the night before He died, and after he have given the Keys to Peter.  You always forget to include those facts in your writings.  Try to remember The whole Christ is really, truly, and substantially present in the Holy Eucharist. Here is historical documents from the early church fathers:

St. Ignatius Bishop of Antioch 1st Century writes:

  

(quote)
The heretics confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our savior Jesus Christ which suffered for our sins.  And, which the Father in his goodness raised up again. Take heed then to have but one Eucharist for there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ.

                                            -St. Ignatius of Antioch
(End of quote)

 

A 2nd Century Bishop writes:

 

(quote)
How can they say that the flesh which is nourished with the body of the Lord and with his blood passes into corruption?"
          
               -Irenaeus, 2nd Century
(end of quote)

 

Now Justin Martry, early 2nd Century, a great defender of the Catholic Faith:

 

(quote)
We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it except the one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the remission of sins, Since Jesus Christ, our Savior, was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood so too we have been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharist prayer.  And set down by him and by the change of which our blood and flesh in nourished, is both the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus.

              -Justin Martyr, early 2nd Century
(end of quote)


 

I would not want to take anything away from what Jesus instituted as a remembrance of Him. The subject was about deception Not the Eucharist. Yet Eucharist is not a word I find in scripture. Perhaps since you think it so important a subject maybe you could give some history about the word and tell us how we got the word Eucharist and when it was first applied. Also When they instilled all the hocus pokus about Transubstantiation. There will always be conlfict about this subject. I already know the argument so it will not serve to go on and on about it.      

God bless

I'm just an excommunicated Catholic layman with a laptop computer, but that's an easy question to answer.  In John 6:53-56 Jesus declares the Eucharist to be his body, and later some Bishop the Roman Catholic Church invented the word Transubstantiation which condenses that whole verse into one word.

"Jesus therefore said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him." (John 6:53-56)

On both sides of the Transubstantiation Argument there are people who have earned a PhD, and still can't understand the fact that it's an act of Faith.  All you have to do to prove that Eternal life comes from belief and not the actual eating of the Eucharist is to substitute the word Eucharist for bread in John 6.

I still think that we need to open a "New Age Section" on this forum.  What you have been saying is pretty much in agreement with what Neale Walsch have been saying. Walsch's vision is an unification of all present theologies to render them more relevant to our present day and time.  Why look back at the history of the Catholics and suffer when you can look forward with Walsch and be happy? Just trying to help.

 

Sorry I'm not a New Ager. Why do you have such a hard time understand who the church is? Is it an institution or is it us who believe.So what do you think ,did the Disciples dined Jesus that night? Did He serve himself on a plate.  What about the last supper. He blessed the wine and the bread and they dined. Funny Jesus just said do this in REMEMBERENCE  of me. and he never said one word that it all became his real flesh and blood. Now if the Eucharist being transformed into his real flesh and blood is so essential to ones salvation then Why did he not explain this to his disciples. Makes you wonder dosen't it?  Yet some one during the time of the Roman catholic church decided that it was trans formed. HMMMM   Where is the word Eucharist derived from in the ancient greek. Was it an invented word they pulled out of the air? 

god bless

[banished]

Jesus did explain it in John 6:

"Jesus therefore said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him." (John 6:53-56)

Catholics will always take you back to this verse, and will also tell you that it's faith. This was in the Church Bulletin about the year of the Priest.  Do you think that they all were bad for 2,000 years.  Huh!

Reflection on this “Year of the Priest”: “At ordination, the soul of the priest is so configured to Christ, that he becomes another Christ, alter Christus, & gives glory to God in imitation of Christ: Priest, Prophet, & King! The priest is designated by God to offer sacrifices, obtain graces for the faithful, make Christ present on the altar, deliver sinners from the clutches of hell, & reopen Heaven to those separated from Him. the dignity of the priest is rooted in his ability to say mass & forgive sins. So great is this dignity that it far exceeds that of kings or presidents, since their power is over only temporal goods, but the priest’s power is over SPIRITUAL goods. Pray that Jesus will conform the hearts of priests into His own Sacred Heart & renew the priesthood begun at the Last Supper.” (Fr. E. Flood)

[mclees8]

Jesus did explain it in John 6:

"Jesus therefore said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him." (John 6:53-56)

Catholics will always take back to this verse, and will also tell you that it's faith. This was in the Church Bullitin about the year of the Priest.  Do you think that they all were bad for 2,000 years.  Huh!

Reflection on this “Year of the Priest”: “At ordination, the soul of the priest is so configured to Christ, that he becomes another Christ, alter Christus, & gives glory to God in imitation of Christ: Priest, Prophet, & King! The priest is designated by God to offer sacrifices, obtain graces for the faithful, make Christ present on the altar, deliver sinners from the clutches of hell, & reopen Heaven to those separated from Him. the dignity of the priest is rooted in his ability to say mass & forgive sins. So great is this dignity that it far exceeds that of kings or presidents, since their power is over only temporal goods, but the priest’s power is over SPIRITUAL goods. Pray that Jesus will conform the hearts of priests into His own Sacred Heart & renew the priesthood begun at the Last Supper.” (Fr. E. Flood)

Hey what can I say. Go for it

God bless.

[banished]

mclees8

Well, you asked me, "Why do you have such a hard time to understand who the church is?", and I believe along with the Roman Catholic Church that at ordination, the soul of the priest is so configured to Christ, that he becomes another Christ, alter Christus, & gives glory to God in imitation of Christ. Lets pray that Jesus will conform the hearts of Catholic priests into His own Sacred Heart & renew the priesthood begun at the Last Supper.

[mclees8]

mclees8

Well, you asked me, "Why do you have such a hard time to understand who the church is?", and I believe along with the Roman Catholic Church that at ordination, the soul of the priest is so configured to Christ, that he becomes another Christ, alter Christus, & gives glory to God in imitation of Christ. Lets pray that Jesus will conform the hearts of Catholic priests into His own Sacred Heart & renew the priesthood begun at the Last Supper.

Wow! thats wild.

So let me ask you. who are you in Christ?  what do mean renew the priesthood? We know the Old Testament Priesthood was done away with when the vail was torn. Now the New testament Priesthood was established. The OT Priest hood was steeped in ritual. But no ritual was instituted in Christs NT church.  The NT says now we are all priests and kings. That's you and me and all who have received Christ. What do you think  about that.? You are also a walking church. did you know that? Know ye no that ye are the Temple of God and the spirit of God dwells within you . So who is the church today is the institution of clergy. or are they  just part of what the whole church is?  Do we go to church or are we a living walking church that consists of all believers 24-7 Oh and thats not New age but he NT priest hood established at the last supper. Our sacrifice is a life that is given. So who is the church?
God bless

[banished]

b

mclees8

Well, you asked me, "Why do you have such a hard time to understand who the church is?", and I believe along with the Roman Catholic Church that at ordination, the soul of the priest is so configured to Christ, that he becomes another Christ, alter Christus, & gives glory to God in imitation of Christ. Lets pray that Jesus will conform the hearts of Catholic priests into His own Sacred Heart & renew the priesthood begun at the Last Supper.

Wow! thats wild.

So let me ask you. who are you in Christ?  what do mean renew the priesthood? We know the Old Testament Priesthood was done away with when the vail was torn. Now the New testament Priesthood was established. The OT Priest hood was steeped in ritual. But no ritual was instituted in Christs NT church.  The NT says now we are all priests and kings. That's you and me and all who have received Christ. What do you think  about that.? You are also a walking church. did you know that? Know ye no that ye are the Temple of God and the spirit of God dwells within you . So who is the church today is the institution of clergy. or are they  just part of what the whole church is?  Do we go to church or are we a living walking church that consists of all believers 24-7 Oh and thats not New age but he NT priest hood established at the last supper. Our sacrifice is a life that is given. So who is the church?
God bless

Good morning mclees8,

I was also surprised when I read that in the Church Bulletin.  Lets think this through!  St Michael Catholic Church is about 50 miles east of San Francisco, and has a 6:00 PM Sunday evening Mass.  That way, Catholics who were out enjoying the weekend can still make their Sunday obligation and hit St. Michael's on the way home.  It's a beautiful little Spanish Church with stained glass windows, and also has a Catholic School. The only down side is the music, which is the worst that I have ever heard in any church.  The priest in that church have a little more sparkle than most, but I never thought of them as Christs.

http://www.saintmichaelliv.org/pages/news.html

Off the top of my head:  I think Christians are under the priesthood of Christ and not Melchizedek. The Jews are under the Aaron priesthood, and the new covenant is by the shedding of Christ's blood. Somehow, the Protestants always come up short, but they sing and shout about the Blood.  So, they must know something about the priesthood of Christ, plus the Pope being a Christ along with the Bishops and Parish Priests? I think the Protestant laypeople claim that they are saints?

[mclees8]

b

mclees8

Well, you asked me, "Why do you have such a hard time to understand who the church is?", and I believe along with the Roman Catholic Church that at ordination, the soul of the priest is so configured to Christ, that he becomes another Christ, alter Christus, & gives glory to God in imitation of Christ. Lets pray that Jesus will conform the hearts of Catholic priests into His own Sacred Heart & renew the priesthood begun at the Last Supper.

Wow! thats wild.

So let me ask you. who are you in Christ?  what do mean renew the priesthood? We know the Old Testament Priesthood was done away with when the vail was torn. Now the New testament Priesthood was established. The OT Priest hood was steeped in ritual. But no ritual was instituted in Christs NT church.  The NT says now we are all priests and kings. That's you and me and all who have received Christ. What do you think  about that.? You are also a walking church. did you know that? Know ye no that ye are the Temple of God and the spirit of God dwells within you . So who is the church today is the institution of clergy. or are they  just part of what the whole church is?  Do we go to church or are we a living walking church that consists of all believers 24-7 Oh and thats not New age but he NT priest hood established at the last supper. Our sacrifice is a life that is given. So who is the church?
God bless

Good morning mclees8,

I was also surprised when I read that in the Church Bulletin.  Lets think this through!  St Michael Catholic Church is about 50 miles east of San Francisco, and has a 6:00 PM Sunday evening Mass.  That way, Catholics who were out enjoying the weekend can still make their Sunday obligation and hit St. Michael's on the way home.  It's a beautiful little Spanish Church with stained glass windows, and also has a Catholic School. The only down side is the music, which is the worst that I have ever heard in any church.  The priest in that church have a little more sparkle than most, but I never thought of them as Christs.

http://www.saintmichaelliv.org/pages/news.html

Off the top of my head:  I think Christians are under the priesthood of Christ and not Melchizedek. The Jews are under the Aaron priesthood, and the new covenant is by the shedding of Christ's blood. Somehow, the Protestants always come up short, but they sing and shout about the Blood.  So, they must know something about the priesthood of Christ, plus the Pope being a Christ along with the Bishops and Parish Priests? I think the Protestant laypeople claim that they are saints?

No I don't believe they are Christ nor the pope and if you believe that I think you are deceiving your self. I don't believe they are transformed into Christ. You don't really believe that do you? There is only one Christ and that is Jesus. The only One who walked without sin. All fall short even the pope. Now New age may think we are all little Gods but that's a lie. It is true that NT scripture refers to all believers as the saints. There are those who may a achieve greater gift of holyness or godlyness. but that does not make more saintly.

[banished]

This is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1597 The sacrament of Holy Orders is conferred by the laying on of hands followed by a solemn prayer of consecration asking God to grant the ordinand the graces of the Holy Spirit required for his ministry. Ordination imprints an indelible sacramental character.

When they say that "Ordination imprints an indelible sacramento character, they must be refering to the Priest having the character of Christ?  What do you think?

Then in 1557 of the Second Vatican Council teaches that the priests are "called the high prieshood, the acme of the sacred ministry." In Hebrews Jesus is high priest for ever.  It's getting pretty thin, if you ask me.

[mclees8]

This is from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1597 The sacrament of Holy Orders is conferred by the laying on of hands followed by a solemn prayer of consecration asking God to grant the ordinand the graces of the Holy Spirit required for his ministry. Ordination imprints an indelible sacramental character.

When they say that "Ordination imprints an indelible sacramento character, they must be refering to the Priest having the character of Christ?  What do you think?

Then in 1557 of the Second Vatican Council teaches that the priests are "called the high prieshood, the acme of the sacred ministry." In Hebrews Jesus is high priest for ever.  It's getting pretty thin, if you ask me.

All of us who called of Christ are being made into his likeness. This si a life long process. We will never fully achieve his perfectness. until the resurrection. There is no earthly High Priest hood. Christ only is High priest If you think ordination makes you holy and perfect just look at your  priest's and so called preachers and pastors records.

They are just human as all of us.   

[mclees8]

Setting the record Straight
 Just thought I would bring this topic post back up to the top of the board for Nights sake.


Satan is the great deceiver . I once wrote a small book or booklet  I was led to call “The Counterfeit“. Because Satan from the beginning of the church has sought to destroy and misguide The Lords church by deception, confusion, and  producing a counterfeit of Christ church. It is a nature of men to fall into apostasy. It is nothing new because apostasy was part of the sin nature as far back as the fall of man.  

First lets understand how apostasy works. We just don’t wake up one day and commit apostasy. It starts out seemingly innocent and harmless, but with time  it will completely change the whole concept of what was first taught.  It is in full blossom when the church returns to worldliness  being guided of men and mans wisdom and carnal instincts Lets look at deception, which is nothing more than a lie that poses as the truth. Confusion is misunderstanding the facts. Which distorts and misleads the truth.  
All  this surrounds this word catholic which the RCC papacy uses to confuse and hold captive the church and even the world  at large. Lets look at when this word was first used. First there is no evidence that this word was used for the church before Ignatius used it in 110 AD. It was just a term that caught on and stuck.  So this word was a term he chose to use to describe those who were the church and were of one universal faith in Christ. It was meant to include all who confessed Jesus as Lord. There were no divisions of the faith. Even though there were some who tried to bring division. There was a vast difference from the church of 110 AD and what the Roman catholic church became in 500AD. First the church was not Roman catholic in 110 AD.  Ignatius  was speaking of all believers which by the true meaning of the word is still all believers today. No Protestant or RCC division.. The papacy made the word synonymous with the Roman catholic church saying the church has always been Catholic, but what they really mean is that the church was always Roman Catholic It was a power and authority issue.  Nothing could be further from the truth. This is the deception that they use to confuse the church into believing the church was always the Roman Catholic papal system and the church that Jesus founded This is deception in capitals and keeps the  people  captive to a false idea that the  self imposed papal authority represents Christ true church. It stopped being Christ True church when the bishops of Rome became drunk with the ideal of being the religious political law of the land, and the center of all Christendom.

The next deception is the true church Christ founded was not political and never was supposed to become a political ambition. Jesus himself rejected this in the temptations of
Satan. What did Satan offer? He said I will give you the whole world if you will worship me . Of course Jesus rejected quickly that we must serve God and Him only. Think about it, Jesus could ruled the world. He would not have had to suffer the cross, but it  was not the Father’s purpose or will. Neither did Jesus ever teach that the church was to dominate or seek to dominate the world religiously or politically  Salvation is not adherence to a religious political authority.. When they became the supreme authority of the land they said salvation could only be achieved through adherence to the papacy. It was not an issue of personal faith anymore. It was forced religion and intimidation that played upon ignorance and fear of losing one’s  salvation by excommunication. or Anathema . Neither Jesus or Peter ever would have been party to this. Christ was presented up front but the real truth was they robbed Jesus seat and falsely claimed to sit in on the throne of Peter. Not to mention Peter would never sit on any throne like any pope. They were in bed with the world and its kings This ambition was worldly and carnal, and is the very reason this church is referred to as the Harlot in Revelation 17.  

The next deception was they said there was no salvation out side the church which is true except they did not truly represent the church because they institutionalized it. They made the church a thing, a hierarchy centered on the idea of authority and leadership. They became an exalted clergy with religious vestments and titles They were the church and there was no true laity because the clergy was exalted above the people who were not saved by personal confession but forced to observance of the Mass and the rituals of the Eucharist. One is not saved by mere observances. .Those who truly confess Jesus from the heart inter into the church by faith, not forced observances. This of course was before the Reformation. But the politics of this world and the exaltation of the clergy is still very much alive. After the reformation the exalted clergy system was still used by Protestant churches.  This gives the mistaken idea that we are going to church instead of being the church.    

God bless



     .  

        

Telling the truth is not a sin. Jesus was crucified for it.