Bobbyaf:

@ Lady

The argument as to whether protestantism is biblical can be discussed here. Logically it makes sense, because it will be seen as an attempt at discounting all the arguments against Catholic traditions that are not in keeping with the bible. In fact there are very few true protestants left anyway. Most denominations have already sold out to the Catholic church anyway. So big deal!

Well the thread has been started, please don't post as David has already started answering the questions, but you are very free to follow. I ask that no one else post so as not to cause confusion on the thread, because I really want that thread to be meaningful, free of insults and ridiculous posts, and I really mean that.

@ lady

Well the thread has been started, please don't post as David has already started answering the questions, but you are very free to follow. I ask that no one else post so as not to cause confusion on the thread, because I really want that thread to be meaningful, free of insults and ridiculous posts, and I really mean that.

I wish you'd take time to proof read your own posts. Does the above in bold make sense to you?

You know, the early reformers were Catholics. Even before Luther, Huldreich Zwingli,John Calvin,etc, members of Catholic clergy had condemned image worship,the ritual of mass, clerical greed and immorality,veneration of saints and Mary, the doctrine of purgatory,monasticism,hierachial priesthood,the validity of sacraments as channels of grace, simony (buying of ecclesiastical offices)etc. There were council meetings to curb clerical abuses and help the poor, and the best Bishops implemented this in their diocese. Even the Reformers,Luther and co, saw themselves as Catholics in pursuit of truth, and urged other Catholics to follow. The Council of Trent met and deliberated for eighteen years,but held that both the Bible and tradition were sources of Catholic belief.   The Roman Inquisition was a response to the 'heresy' of the reformers and slowed it down. 'Bloody Mary' Tudor, a fanatical Catholic, restored England to Roman Catholism by a great many reformist and protestand burnings at the stake.Most of her fellow English Catholics were reconciled to the reformation and hated her.

And the St Bartholomew's Day massacre in France in 1572. 3000 Reformers, called Huguenots there, were killed by Catholics in Paris alone. Twenty thousand more were killed throughout France. Inquisitions,burnings at the stake: hardly the Christian response to doctrinal dissention, is it?Dissention against extrabiblical Catholic practices wholly absent in the New Testament,upon which Christianity is based. Doctrines and practices instituted by men at councils. The Council at Trent,though sincere and well intentioned,held that the Catholic faith is inclusive of tradition. One would take that to mean the traditional practices of their times, the middles ages.

The Reformers themselves were Catholics who read the Bible for themselves and argued against these unChristian,extrabiblical practices and doctrines. It takes a special courage to be able to examine your own beliefs, be willing to temporarily lose the crutches men have used to prop you up in the name of religion, to seek out the truth of the Bible. These Catholics had that courage in spades. And that was five,six hundred years ago. Yet, in these times, hundreds of years later, you still find Catholics who would justify these same extrabiblical practices and council-promulgated doctrines at all costs.

It's odd, how Catholism rotated on its foundations,until it bore a striking similarity the Levitical priesthood order of the Old Testament: men consecrated to God on behalf of the masses, priests who intercede for their fellow men, and take their sins away by sacrifices (penance). What is a Pope,God's representative on earth?Where is all that to be found in the teachings of Christ?

We came up with the monikers 'Catholism' and 'Protestatism' and 'Anabaptist' and 'Pentecostal'. God did not. A follower of Christ,by definition, follows Christ,irrespective of denomination,and not men. And all Christ taught and what he stands for and practised, and what he and his apostles did not teach, is to be found in the New Testament. It is His words we will all have to reckon with in the end, not the doctrines of councils. One thousand solemn councils may decree a thing,and their faithfuls may defend those doctrines because they feel they must,but neither God nor Christ has decreed them.
Which was more than enough for those ancient Catholics who insisted that the Bible is enough.

@NO 2ATHEISM
WHY DONT YOU ALSO BELIEVE OTHER THINGS THAT WERE IMPLIED IN THE BIBLE LIKE THE CONCEPT OF PURGATORY.

WHY DO YOU PROTESTANTS HOLD ON TO THE BIBLE THAT WAS SELECTED BY CATHOLICS ,WHY DONT YOU SELECT UR OWN BIBLE OR BETTER STILL CONTINUE WITH UR FATHER MATIN LUTHER'S BIBLE THAT REMOVES THE BOOKS OF JAMES AND REVELATION.

@BOBBYAFF,

IF YOU DONT NAME YOUR CHURCH IT MEANS YOU ARE A BLOODY HYPOCRITE ,SINCE IT IS OBVIOUS YOU HAVE A LOT TO HIDE.I AM A ROMAN CATHOLIC AND I CAN FLAUNT IT ANYWAY SINCE I AM VERY PROUD OF IT.I STILL INSIST YOU MUST NAME UR CHURCH

@ Mad Max

There is hope for Catholics. In fact God is calling them through different means and ways to the simplicity of faith and practice.  When Martin Luther came across the biblical injunction "the just shall live by faith" , he responded immediately. Thank God for His honesty, and his willingness to stand up for the truth, an act in itself that was considered suicidal.

I am sorry for members of the RCC. They have been blinded by all that deceit, mysticism, and sophistry of their organization, but God's words are powerful to save and deliver.

Revelation 18:3,4 say, "3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. 4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues."

Soon the Roman church will enforce her [b]mark [/b]upon all citizens of the earth.  Since 1929 she has been growing in strength since her deadly wound was healed.

What we are not able to accomplish through the word of God in regards to enlightening her followers, prophetic fulfillment will do. All of God's people who are sealed for eternal life will eventually see the glorious light of truth, and will depart.

@ Mad Max

There is hope for Catholics. In fact God is calling them through different means and ways to the simplicity of faith and practice.  When Martin Luther came across the biblical injunction "the just shall live by faith" , he responded immediately. Thank God for His honesty, and his willingness to stand up for the truth, an act in itself that was considered suicidal.

I am sorry for members of the RCC. They have been blinded by all that deceit, mysticism, and sophistry of their organization, but God's words are powerful to save and deliver.

Revelation 18:3,4 say, "3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. 4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues."

Soon the Roman church will enforce her [b]mark [/b]upon all citizens of the earth.  Since 1929 she has been growing in strength since her deadly wound was healed.

What we are not able to accomplish through the word of God in regards to enlightening her followers, prophetic fulfillment will do. All of God's people who are sealed for eternal life will eventually see the glorious light of truth, and will depart.

@bobbybaff
my man nane ur church .For christ's sake whatz wrong wit that.Iam still waiting for u to re-inteprete prophet daniel's prophecy based on 1260 days or you show me where you saw the duration of 1260 yrs in the bible

@ chukwudi44

@bobbybaff
my man nane ur church .For christ's sake whatz wrong wit that.Iam still waiting for u to re-inteprete prophet daniel's prophecy based on 1260 days or you show me where you saw the duration of 1260 yrs in the bible

Obviously you have not been reading my postings in this thread. I'd advise you to go through the earlier part of the thread and you'll find the answers you are searching for. Why does it matter to you as to what denomination I belong to? Does that have any bearing on you personally?

Bobbyaf:

@ lady

I wish you'd take time to proof read your own posts. Does the above in bold make sense to you?

and sometimes I really wish you would learn to understand english. Go to the thread and you will see why I said don't post. I asked for only one protestant, and david is the protestant asking. I asked you to follow as in you can READ the thread, but don't POST. Does one have to post in order to follow a thread? Can't one be reading along and still be following thread as n keeping up with the thread?

your denomination will make me know yhat am cctually communicating wit a "true" christian.ALSO PLEASE RE-INTEPPRETE DANIEL'S PROPHECY OR SHOW ME WHERE U SAW 1260 YRS

@ lady

@Bobbyaf, may I start a thread about it? I have so much to ask you

You have so much to ask me yet I must only follow, and not post?

You're something else lady.

@ chukwudi44

your denomination will make me know yhat am cctually communicating wit a "true" christian.ALSO PLEASE RE-INTEPPRETE DANIEL'S PROPHECY OR SHOW ME WHERE U SAW 1260 YRS

I am a Christian and that is all you need to know for now. Sorry!

You have so much to ask me yet I must only follow, and not post?

oh so that's what you were talking about. I used the plural "you". You Bobbyaf was standing for all protestants at that point.

When I made the other statemen I already started the thread, which states that only one protestant is needed. But I see you posted there anyway, and I obliged to respond to you. But please have respect for the thread, and the readers. I don't want it derailed with rubbish and insults from protestants and catholics as well. That's why I initially wanted only one protestant posting. I also didn't want redundancy which tends to happen with more than one poster from each side, and that makes a thread boring, I want it to be invigorating and fruitful. I want people to learn from it.

@ lady

When I made the other statemen I already started the thread, which states that only one protestant is needed. But I see you posted there anyway, and I obliged to respond to you. But please have respect for the thread, and the readers. I don't want it derailed with rubbish and insults from protestants and catholics as well. That's why I initially wanted only one protestant posting. I also didn't want redundancy which tends to happen with more than one poster from each side, and that makes a thread boring, I want it to be invigorating and fruitful. I want people to learn from it.

I am trying hard to really make sense of the above.

@ Lady

oh so that's what you were talking about. I used the plural "you". You Bobbyaf was standing for all protestants at that point.  Grin

You certainly have developed the art of excusing yourself when you obviously made an error. If I am standing for all protestants according to you, then logically I should be the one invited by you to debate, since it was in my thread you raised the issue as to whether or not protestantism is biblical.

When it became clear to you that truth was being unfolded right before your eyes you thought of a way of escape, but alas, you have been discovered. 

It is essential to understand that two basic false teachings of Roman Catholicism (even apart from its many other errors), clearly classify it as a false cult rather than a true church. These two basic errors are:

1. Roman Catholicism, although teaching that the Bible is the Word of God, adds the spurious apocryphal books to the Scriptures, and also elevates church tradition and the edicts of popes and councils (the words of men), to the same or an even greater level of authority than the Word of God. This amounts to adding to the Word of God, thereby placing Roman Catholicism under God's curse. (Deuteronomy 4:2; Revelation 22:18-19)

2. Roman Catholicism, although teaching that faith in Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation, actually denies the truth of the Gospel by adding sacraments, good works, and purgatory as additional requirements for forgiveness of sin and for eternal life. This amounts to the preaching of a false Gospel which places the Roman Catholic Church under God's curse. (Galatians 1:6-10)

They believe purgatory is a place where a person is purified of sins – even popes supposedly go there. The Bible says, when a person dies their eternal home is sealed – heaven or hell – there is no place in between like purgatory. (Hebrews 9:27) The word "purgatory" and its concept is not found in the Bible.


They believe in worshiping images of Mary, crucifix, saints, angels, etc. The Bible speaks out against this. (Exodus 20:4-5)


They believe in repetitious prayer to Mary, saints and angels. The complete Rosary involves repeating the Hail Mary 53 times, the Lord's prayer 6 times, 5 Mysteries, 5 Meditations on the Mysteries, 5 Glory Be's, and the Apostles' Creed. The Rosary did not come into general use until after the beginning of the thirteenth century, and not officially sanctioned until after the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century. The concept of praying to Mary, saints, and angels is not found in the Bible; on the contrary, we are directed to pray to our Father. (Matthew 6:9-13) In the Rosary, Mary is prayed to almost 9 times for every prayer directed to God. The Bible speaks out very clearly against praying in vain repetitions as the heathens do.

In "The Holy Father's Prayer for the Marian Year [1987]," John Paul II asks Mary to do what only God can do – comfort, guide, strengthen, and protect "the whole of humanity , " His prayer ends: "Sustain us, O Virgin Mary, on our journey of faith and obtain for us the grace of eternal salvation." (4/97, Berean Call).

A Roman Catholic ritual for selling a home - Put a statue of St. Joseph in a bottle or mason jar and bury it in the front yard (head first), thereby guaranteeing a quick sale of the home. After the sale, the seller is to dig up St. Joseph, put him in a prominent place in the new residence, and pray to him (Mother Angelica, EWTN Catholic TV, 10/95).

And it continues,

I find all this both serious and humorous all at once.

1. Roman Catholicism, although teaching that the Bible is the Word of God, adds the spurious apocryphal books to the Scriptures, and also elevates church tradition and the edicts of popes and councils (the words of men), to the same or an even greater level of authority than the Word of God. This amounts to adding to the Word of God, thereby placing Roman Catholicism under God's curse. (Deuteronomy 4:2; Revelation 22:18-19)

If you trust the Roman Catholic Church to have infallibly defined the books of the New Testament what makes you think we got the Old Testament wrong?

FYI, the apocrypha were not taken out by the Jews until after the death of Jesus Christ. The book Christ himself studied and quoted from includes the deuterocanonical books known to you as the apocrypha.

If Roman Catholicism is under a curse because of the books it defined as scripture, you have knowingly put yourself under the same curse by accepting the books that the Roman Catholic Church defined as scripture.

2. Roman Catholicism, although teaching that faith in Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation, actually denies the truth of the Gospel by adding sacraments, good works, and purgatory as additional requirements for forgiveness of sin and for eternal life. This amounts to the preaching of a false Gospel which places the Roman Catholic Church under God's curse. (Galatians 1:6-10)

Do you mind telling me what the sacraments are?
Purgatory is in the Bible, go and actually read your Bible, and don't just browse through it like a magazine or read it to see what you want to see, ask God to open your eyes. Purgatory is in the Bible dear.
So what are you supposed to do? Bad works?

They believe purgatory is a place where a person is purified of sins – even popes supposedly go there. The Bible says, when a person dies their eternal home is sealed – heaven or hell – there is no place in between like purgatory. (Hebrews 9:27) The word "purgatory" and its concept is not found in the Bible.

And yet Christ himself had to descend unto the place of the dead to release the souls in prison, I pray thee what is that place?

They believe in worshiping images of Mary, crucifix, saints, angels, etc. The Bible speaks out against this. (Exodus 20:4-5)

First of all we don't worship Mary and the saints, secondly, why did the God command that no graven image should be made of everything in heaven or hell or on the earth, and then command that an image of the cherubim be constructed for the ark and that moses should raise a bronze serpent in the desert and that the Isrealites should look up to it and they will be saved, and why did Christ say that he is like the serpent that was raised, why would he be like a graven image?

They believe in repetitious prayer to Mary, saints and angels. The complete Rosary involves repeating the Hail Mary 53 times, the Lord's prayer 6 times, 5 Mysteries, 5 Meditations on the Mysteries, 5 Glory Be's, and the Apostles' Creed. The Rosary did not come into general use until after the beginning of the thirteenth century, and not officially sanctioned until after the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century. The concept of praying to Mary, saints, and angels is not found in the Bible; on the contrary, we are directed to pray to our Father. (Matthew 6:9-13) In the Rosary, Mary is prayed to almost 9 times for every prayer directed to God. The Bible speaks out very clearly against praying in vain repetitions as the heathens do.

My dear what are the mysteries of the rosary that we meditate on?
Is the Our Father wrong, and is the hail Mary wrong also, is the glory be wrong too, and what about the apostle's creed. Please write every single one of them out and then point us to what is wrong in them.

In "The Holy Father's Prayer for the Marian Year [1987]," John Paul II asks Mary to do what only God can do – comfort, guide, strengthen, and protect "the whole of humanity , " His prayer ends: "Sustain us, O Virgin Mary, on our journey of faith and obtain for us the grace of eternal salvation." (4/97, Berean Call).

Amen. Are you angry because you think Mary doesn't pray for you, don't worry she does pray for you and she loves you. And yes Jesus wants you to stop disrespecting him by disrespecting his mother.

@ Lady

If you trust the Roman Catholic Church to have infallibly defined the books of the New Testament what makes you think we got the Old Testament wrong?

Circumstantially, the true church of God was suppressed under Catholic rule, hence God used good scholars from the catholic church to have simply collated scriptures, but that is all they did, and I wouldn't say it was done infallibly either.

FYI, the apocrypha were not taken out by the Jews until after the death of Jesus Christ. The book Christ himself studied and quoted from includes the deuterocanonical books known to you as the apocrypha.

There is no proof of that.

Do you mind telling me what the sacraments are?

I believe we both know them, so save the fora the trouble.

Purgatory is in the Bible, go and actually read your Bible, and don't just browse through it like a magazine or read it to see what you want to see, ask God to open your eyes. Purgatory is in the Bible dear.
So what are you supposed to do? Bad works?

Factually, that doctrine was invented by the RCC. None of the apostles of Christ, or Christ Himself taught it. It is a fabrication invented by the church to have robbed poor people of their hard-earned money. That doctrine was associated with the indulgencies.

And yet Christ himself had to descend unto the place of the dead to release the souls in prison, I pray thee what is that place?

I am not surprised that you would have said that, but unfortunately, the verses in question say no such thing. By the way I was hoping you'd have quoted the passage as support. Let me do what you have failed to do and that is to show scriptural references.


1 Peter 3:18-20
18 "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: 19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

This has been one of the most misunderstood passages in the bible, largely because people tend to take out of context what was being said, or they usually fail to capture the grammatical syntax. If you read the grammar carefully you'd notice that it didn't say Christ went to preach, but rather that the Spirit by which He was quickened, was once used by Christ in the past , to reach out to the antediluvian. Their spirits were disobedient it says in those days, and not that the Spirit of God, or Christ after His death was now dealing with those persons who had already died.

Logically speaking if those antediluvians were rejected by God before, then why would God have to go in search after their souls, since their probabtion would have been closed there and then. The bible teaches that after a person dies the judgment follows which is a universal principle that isn't affected by time lines.

First of all we don't worship Mary and the saints, secondly, why did the God command that no graven image should be made of everything in heaven or hell or on the earth, and then command that an image of the cherubim be constructed for the ark and that moses should raise a bronze serpent in the desert and that the Isrealites should look up to it and they will be saved, and why did Christ say that he is like the serpent that was raised, why would he be like a graven image?

The difference lies in God's own motives for commanding those constructions. Moses was directly under God's instructions. God knows however, that when men make graven images outside of His instructions and supervision, their intentions are different. How else would we be justified in denouncing pagan images and icons if it were ok for all and sundry to up and make images for their own purposes?

Let me prove to you that Mary is worshipped, for if she weren't then Catholic leaders would not have placed her in such high esteem by teaching what Christ, nor His apostles have never taught The scriptures say "For there is one God, and ONE MEDIATOR between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." 1 Timothy 2:5

To assume that she is now queen of heaven, and co-redemtrix without one ounce of biblical proof is tantamount to Marian worship.

Amen. Are you angry because you think Mary doesn't pray for you, don't worry she does pray for you and she loves you. And yes Jesus wants you to stop disrespecting him by disrespecting his mother.

Only if I thought for one second that she wasn't in her grave awaiting the last trump. My anger rests with the level of deception that has gripped you and those who think like you. Its called holy indignation.

Circumstantially, the true church of God was suppressed under Catholic rule, hence God used good scholars from the catholic church to have simply collated scriptures, but that is all they did, and I wouldn't say it was done infallibly either.

The true Church of God would not be able to be surpressed, it was to be a light on the hill, light doesn't hide, it doesn't get surpressed. If the true Church got surpressed, Christ was lying.

If the Catholic Church did not infallibly define the books of the Bible, then the Bible isn't infallible. The New Testament books were not written to be scripture. Therefore when the Church defined the books of the Bible as scripture, She infallibly did so, or else the Bible wouldn't be infallible.

There is no proof of that.

There is a whole lot of proof, do research on Jewish history. Remember the Jews were dispersed all over, and they had Torahs everywhere. Before the time of Christ, there was the Alexandrine Canon, the Pharisess and Saducees revised the canon, and refused to allow the Deuterocanonical books because they weren't written in hebrew or they weren't written in Palestine. They had four criteria for creating their revised Jewish Canon 1) They had to be in harmony with the Pentatuech 2) They had to have been written in the time of Ezra 3) They had to have been written in Hebrew 4) They had to have been written in Palestine.

Judith, Tobit, and parts of Daniel and Esther were written in Aramaic and probably outside of Palestine, Wisdom and 2 Maccabees were written in Greek, Baruch was written outside of Palestine, and Sirach and 1 Maccabees were written after the time of Ezra. Notice that none of them were removed because they were in conflict with the Pentateuch.

Thus the Palestinian Canon was created, but it wasn't until after the death of Christ did every Jew start using the Palestinian Canon. Jesus himself used the Alexandrine Canon.

You can read more about the difference between the Palestinian canon and the Alexandrine canon here http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm

I believe we both know them, so save the fora the trouble.

I know them, however you do not. If you did you wouldn't have made the statement that they are additions by the Church for the salvation of souls.

Factually, that doctrine was invented by the RCC. None of the apostles of Christ, or Christ Himself taught it. It is a fabrication invented by the church to have robbed poor people of their hard-earned money. That doctrine was associated with the indulgencies.

Factually the apostles taught Purgatory. I will only present to you biblical passages, but also keep in mind that the successors of the apostles in their writings also acknowledged prayer for the dead because of their stay in purgatory.

1 Corinthians 15: 29
Otherwise what will people accomplish by having themselves baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, then why having them baptized for them?

To give a background of what is going on in this chapter. Paul is disputing the heresies of no resurrection of the dead. But notice that he mentions baptism for the dead. The normal protestant view is that once you're dead, you're going to hell or to heaven, no purgatory, but we know that in heaven one wouldn't need baptism because they are already saved, and in hell one cannot be saved, so no baptism there. So why would Paul speak of baptism for the dead? Why would the dead need baptism? There's no hope for them after deat right?
This passage also proves that baptism is salvific, it is not just merely symbolic, as several other passages state also

1 Corinthians 3:10-15
10 According to the grace of God given to you, likewise a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it. But each one must be careful how h builds upon it.
11 for no one can lay a foundation other than the one that is there, namely, Jesus Christ
12 If anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, r straw
13 the work of each will come to light, for the day will disclose it. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each one's work
14 If the work stands that someone built upon the foundation, that person will receive a wage
15 But if someone's work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved but only as through fire.

How would you interpret the above passage?

1 Peter 3:18-20
18 "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: 19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

This has been one of the most misunderstood passages in the bible, largely because people tend to take out of context what was being said, or they usually fail to capture the grammatical syntax. If you read the grammar carefully you'd notice that it didn't say Christ went to preach, but rather that the Spirit by which He was quickened, was once used by Christ in the past , to reach out to the antediluvian. Their spirits were disobedient it says in those days, and not that the Spirit of God, or Christ after His death was now dealing with those persons who had already died.

Logically speaking if those antediluvians were rejected by God before, then why would God have to go in search after their souls, since their probabtion would have been closed there and then. The bible teaches that after a person dies the judgment follows which is a universal principle that isn't affected by time lines.

first of all it says "he went and preached to the spirits in prison" so Jesus did go to preach to thoe who were in the land of the dead.

second, what spirit was used by Christ in the past?
How many spirits did Christ use? Did he use a different spirit while he was alive or what? explain that to me.

third, that verse proves that their probabtion wouldn't have been closed there and then, that verse proves your point to be false. If it was closed they wouldn't have been saved. Notice that is says "eight souls were saved by water" they were saved after their death. You assume that you hold the correct position when you say that their probabtion had been closed there and then. That verse is telling you that you are wrong.
You assume that no one can be saved even after death, that verse is telling you that 8 people were saved after death. You saw what you wanted to see, you didn't see the truth here.

So instead of taking what you believe and inserting it into the Bible, let the Bible tell you what it is actually saying. The problem is that protestants already have constructed what they believe and anything contrary would be wrong, therefore their interpretation of the Bible must fit their belief and not their belief fitting the Bible, it doesn't work that way. In this interpretation you contradicted the Bible verse.

The difference lies in God's own motives for commanding those constructions. Moses was directly under God's instructions. God knows however, that when men make graven images outside of His instructions and supervision, their intentions are different. How else would we be justified in denouncing pagan images and icons if it were ok for all and sundry to up and make images for their own purposes?

In this statement you are claiming that God would contradict himself. You're ultimately saying that it is ok to have graven images and bow before it or look up to it as long as God instructs you to, even though he already gave the instruction not to make any graven images.
God wouldn't contradict himself. Lol, you know you just reminded me of something Olabowale, muslim, on this board said to me one day. Here's the story.

I was speaking to Olabowale one day on the phone and as usual we were discussing our religions. He then said to me that if a muslim is facing death, and those who wish to kill him want to kill him because he's a muslim, if he isn't ready to die it is ok for him to say that he is not a muslim, but if he is ready to die he can say that he is.
SO I asked him, "wouldn't that be lying?"
Olabowale said no, it wouldn't because Allah said so.
So apparentl as long as Allah said it's ok to break one of his commandments it is ok.

My dear Bobbyaf, do you see the connection between your statement and his? to both of you as long as God says so, it is ok to break his commandments.

(Are you Olabowale pretending to be a muslim, because I remember telling you you were making statements as a muslim would a while back)

Now that doesn't see like what God would do now does it?

What that commandment tells us is that we should not put anyone or anything in the place of God or above God. Even things that are not physical can be a graven image and can be bowed to. You can place money and sex above God.
When the center of your life is no longer God, then you have violated the first commandment. You have chosen whatever occupies your time as your god.

As for the statues, they are not worshipped, neither are they viewed as God. God is still and will always be very much the central figure in a Catholic's faith, if this changes they are no longer Catholic.

Let me prove to you that Mary is worshipped, for if she weren't then Catholic leaders would not have placed her in such high esteem by teaching what Christ, nor His apostles have never taught  The scriptures say "For there is one God, and ONE MEDIATOR between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." 1 Timothy 2:5

And that is why She is not God nor equal to God. SO no the Catholic leaders did no such thing. I know this because I have the church documents, it is there for everyone to read, so you don't need to go to anti-catholic websites to tell you what it is, you can go straight to the source, you can read the actual documents. You however are confused on what the terms used in the documents mean. Mary is not our mediator between God and man, also don't forget Jesus is God, and she can definitely ask something of her Son, and that is called mediation or intercession, actualy each one of us are mediators, as long as you can pray for me you are a mediator for me. So your point only shows your lack of knowledge on the meaning of the term mediator.

To your point about Mary being on a high esteem, how do you expect the Mother of God to be treated, what role do you expect her to play, do you understand motherhood at all. Would you appreciate it if one of your friends were to say your mother is irrelevant in bringing you to the world or were to say your mother is irrelevant at all?

And just so you know God places Mary on a high esteem and we follow suit. Luke 1 26-28
26 In the 6th month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a town of Galilee called Nazareth
27 to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph of the house of David, and the virgin's name was Mary.
28 And coming to her, he said "HAIL, FULL OF GRACE, THE LORD IS WITH YOU"

Angel Gabriel here speaks for God as God is the one that sent him, and he HAILS her, that alone puts her on high esteem, God himself is giving Mary a ROYAL GREETING.

The word for full of grace in greek is Kecharitomene, and it is used for only one other person in the Bible, Jesus Christ. The same word used to describe Jesus Christ is the same word used to describe Mary, this is not of our doing, it is straight from the Bible.

Mary herself esteemed herself when she said "ALL GENERATIONS WILL CALL ME BLESSED"
Is she arrogant, absolutely not, for God himself gave her a royal greeting.

Notice also that she said ALL GENERATIONS, and not some generations or my generation, no, she said ALL GENERATIONS WILL CALL ME BLESSED, so why don't you call her blessed?

To assume that she is now queen of heaven, and co-redemtrix without one ounce of biblical proof is tantamount to Marian worship.

What would you call the mother of a King? a random woman, an irrelevant vessel to bring the King to the world to rule a kingdom and then relegated to the background.

Well sir Jesus isn't just any King, he is the King of the Davidic Kingdom, he sits on the throne of David forever Luke 1:31-33
31 Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus
32 He will be great and the Lord God will give him the throne of David his father
33 and he will rule over the house of Jacob forever and his kingdom will have no end.

Now let us see who is queen in the Davidic Kingdom.

1 Kings 2:19
Then Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him for Adonijah: and the king arose to meet her, and bowed to her, and sat down upon his throne: and a throne was set for the king's mother, and she sat on his right hand.

Notice that the Queen sits on the right hand of the King and not just on any chair, she sits on a throne. In the Davidic Kingdom the mother is Queen. Jesus is King of the Davidic kingdom, Mary his Mother is Queen.

Remember also that God gave her a ROYAL GREETING. The word "HAIL" is not used for someone who is not of a royal household, it isn't even used for anyone but the reigning King or Queen.

This is not our doing, but God's doing. You can deny it till they kingdom come, it will never change. God doesn't change to fit our minds, our minds change to fit God. I know it is a hard pill to swallow but it is the truth. If Jesus sits on the throne of David, then his mother Mary is Queen, for the Mother reigns as Queen in the Davidic kingdom.

Now for co-redemptrix, have you ever heard of a co-pilot? Is he or she ever equal to the Pilot?
Well I've flown in planes too many times to know that and know enough about aeronautics to know that the co-pilot is never equal to the Pilot. Co does not insinuate equality.
Each one of us can be co-redemptrix, for we all play our part in building up the Church, and bringing souls to God.

Only if I thought for one second that she wasn't in her grave awaiting the last trump. My anger rests with the level of deception that has gripped you and those who think like you.  Its called holy indignation

Well I am sorry that you do no understand the Bibel, but there is no way Mary is in her grave. God isn't disrespectful to his mother. His mother isn't full of sin, she is ful of grace. As in she has complete grace, we all have partial grace and we won't have complete grace until we are in heaven, but she had complete grace on earth, and she had it even before she gave birth to God.
That sanctifying grace that we are all striving for after his birth and death and resurrection, she had it before he was born. She had every grace that can be given, she had it all. No one who is full of grace, the grace that she and Jesus have will  be in the grave.

If so then God's complete grace isn't able to save.

@Bobbyaf
Well,I know nothing about prophecy. But I was baptised and raised Catholic. It took varying time spans but every member of my family voluntarily departed from Catholism, without being urged by a soul. God's been in the business of delivering people a long time. No doubt he is more than capable of leading individuals to Himself,including Catholics.

are you still one, Max?

mad max

you still need deliverance .a deliverance that will bringb you back 2 the true faith.

bobbyaff

why are you ashamed of your church ,is it that they have so much 2 hide

KarmaMod:

are you still one, Max?

NO. I doubt I ever really was one. I was merely born into it, which is no reason to stick to a thing.

chukwudi44:

mad max
You still need deliverance .a deliverance that will bringb you back 2 the true faith.

Yes massa.

@ Lady

The true Church of God would not be able to be surpressed, it was to be a light on the hill, light doesn't hide, it doesn't get surpressed. If the true Church got surpressed, Christ was lying.

Is persecuted a better word? So who were those bible-believing Christians who were burnt at the stake may I ask? Who were those Christians that were tied up in dungeons to rot for their faith? Who were those Christians who were torn apart on the racks? Who were those Christian mothers who had their unborn cut from their bodies? Who were those Christian children and wives who were fed with their father's flesh? Were they Roman Catholics? Listen carefully Lady you have not the slightest clue as to what God's true church went through during the middle ages. Now let me give you some biblical proof from John's words as to what God's church will pass through before reaching heaven:

Revelation 7:9-14
"9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; 10 And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb. 11 And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God, 12 Saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen. 13 And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they? 14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."

By the way you noticed nothing was mentioned of Mary,

Revelation 12:13,14 say, "13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child. 14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent."

As was mentioned to you before that woman in prophecy means church, God's true church in this sense. It was shown clearly that for 1260 literal years which is symbolized by the expression time, and times, and half a time

How did the prophet say she would be persecuted? 15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.

Water in prophecy means people in accordance with Revelation 17:15 "And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the LovePeddler sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues."

The dragon represented pagan Rome which passed its authority to papal Rome. In other words the popes replaced the Caesars whose doctrines were rejected by the true church that was persecuted for not paying homage to edicts and dogmas. This LovePeddler which sits on top of the waters controls the nations today as it did then. This great apostate movement called the Roman Catholic church cannot hide because history is there to reveal what she did in the past, while prophecy is there to reveal what she intends to do in the future. Your own pope confessed to the persecutions.

If the Catholic Church did not infallibly define the books of the Bible, then the Bible isn't infallible.

No one is infallible but God. Not even the apostles claimed infallibility. As I have said before on more than one occasions, that God used people from the RCC to have collated and put together a canonized standard of the scriptures. If there were no scriptures there could have been no canonization in the first place, but that does change the fact that the RCC in general is an apostate movement.

The New Testament books were not written to be scripture. Therefore when the Church defined the books of the Bible as scripture, She infallibly did so, or else the Bible wouldn't be infallible.

When St. Paul said that all scripture is given by inspiration of God what was he talking about? The parchments, and apostolic letters are all scriptures. Anything that is written is called scripture. I thought you knew that. The only difference is that these scriptures came about by inspiration. The minds of men were illuminated by God's Spirit to have written down what God inspired them to.

Factually the apostles taught Purgatory. I will only present to you biblical passages, but also keep in mind that the successors of the apostles in their writings also acknowledged prayer for the dead because of their stay in purgatory.

I am not interested in what successors had to say. I only go by what inspired writers had to say by way of the scriptures.

1 Corinthians 15: 29
Otherwise what will people accomplish by having themselves baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, then why having them baptized for them?

To give a background of what is going on in this chapter. Paul is disputing the heresies of no resurrection of the dead. But notice that he mentions baptism for the dead. The normal protestant view is that once you're dead, you're going to hell or to heaven, no purgatory, but we know that in heaven one wouldn't need baptism because they are already saved, and in hell one cannot be saved, so no baptism there. So why would Paul speak of baptism for the dead? Why would the dead need baptism? There's no hope for them after deat right?

On my part I don't believe that people after death go to heaven, or hell. I won't necessarily dwell on that aspect of things at this time in point though. I will deal directly with 1 Corinthians 15:9. With that said it is extremely important to read Paul's words in context. It is also important to realize that Corinth was riddled with pagan concepts that tended to influence Christians just like how stuff can influence Christians today.

Notice something here, Paul used this example from the pagans in 1 Cor. 15:29, when he said, ", if the dead are not raised, then why are they baptized for the dead?" Paul did not say we.1 This is significant because the Christian church was not practicing baptism for the dead, but the pagans were.

Why would Paul refer to they? Why would Paul say, "if the dead are not raised, " when he was 100% certain of the resurrection. In previous verses before these he mentions the reality of the Christian's resurrection. Paul's point was simple. The resurrection is a reality. It is going to happen when Jesus returns. Even the pagans believe in the resurrection, otherwise, why would they baptize for the dead? However, some are not convinced by this argument and state that the word "they" is not in the Greek and, therefore, Paul is not speaking about the pagans,  Let's take a look.

Literally, the verse is translated as "Since what will do the being immersed on behalf of the dead if wholly dead not are raised why also are they immersed on behalf of them."

The issue here is the word, "baptizontai" -- "they are baptized."  It is the present, passive, indicative, 3rd person, plural. In other words, it is THEY ARE BEING BAPTIZED or, THEY ARE BAPTIZED. It is the latter form, the third person plural (they) which the verb "baptizo" is in. Therefore, the best translation is "THEY are baptized."

This passage also proves that baptism is salvific, it is not just merely symbolic, as several other passages state also

The act of baptism is not salvivic. No one can be saved by baptism alone.

1 Corinthians 3:10-15
10 According to the grace of God given to you, likewise a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building upon it. But each one must be careful how h builds upon it. 11 for no one can lay a foundation other than the one that is there, namely, Jesus Christ 12 If anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, r straw 13 the work of each will come to light, for the day will disclose it. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each one's work 14 If the work stands that someone built upon the foundation, that person will receive a wage 15 But if someone's work is burned up, that one will suffer loss; the person will be saved but only as through fire.

How would you interpret the above passage?

I prefer quoting from the KJV which says,

10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. 11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; 13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Actually it is pretty straight forward. Paul is talking about the gospel ministry that he is involved in. He is saying that those who come after him should take heed not to add what will not strengthen the ministry, and each addition's true colors will be revealed after being tested. He's not ruling out those failed cases because God uses difficult circumstances at times to save each and everyone of us.

first of all it says "he went and preached to the spirits in prison" so Jesus did go to preach to thoe who were in the land of the dead.

The grammar didn't say that.

second, what spirit was used by Christ in the past?
How many spirits did Christ use? Did he use a different spirit while he was alive or what? explain that to me.

There is only one Spirit of God that has been convicting men to follow God. What Peter was saying is that this same Spirit that quickened Christ, or as it were brought back life to Christ, was the same Spirit that appealed to the antediluvians.

In Genesis 6:3 it says, "3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."

Bear in mind that in other verses Peter made mention of the world that was destroyed by a flood. He referenced that event to show that God's Spirit that appealed to the people before the flood is the same Spirit that quickened Christ from the dead. Logically Jesus was not yet manifested in the flesh at the time of the flood, but His Spirit was very much apart of plan of salvation in convicting the world then and now to repent.

You see the bible does not and cannot contradict itself. The teaching of Christ and His apostles clearly state that after death comes the judgment. There can be no more repentance in the grave. Why would Paul say in quoting the scriptures, "today if you hear my voice harden not your hearts" "Now is the day of salvation" if he knew that if a person died whose sins were not forgiven by God, could be placed in purgatory to be given another chance.

The whole idea of the teachings of Christ and His apostles/Disciples was to call people to repentance before it was too late.

third, that verse proves that their probabtion wouldn't have been closed there and then, that verse proves your point to be false. If it was closed they wouldn't have been saved. Notice that is says "eight souls were saved by water" they were saved after their death. You assume that you hold the correct position when you say that their probabtion had been closed there and then. That verse is telling you that you are wrong.

The 8 people mentioned were Noah, his wife, his 3 sons and their wives who were the only righteous ones left from the flood. My argument was not addressing them, but those who refused to enter the ark of safety.

You assume that no one can be saved even after death, that verse is telling you that 8 people were saved after death. You saw what you wanted to see, you didn't see the truth here.

And that is because they were saved from the flood, as well as when they died. They were righteous before the Lord.

So instead of taking what you believe and inserting it into the Bible, let the Bible tell you what it is actually saying. The problem is that protestants already have constructed what they believe and anything contrary would be wrong, therefore their interpretation of the Bible must fit their belief and not their belief fitting the Bible, it doesn't work that way. In this interpretation you contradicted the Bible verse.

I'd advise you to take a serious look at what the RCC has done in adding and subtracting from the very bible they canonized. All those things that we have pointed out to you have fallen on deaf ears it seems.

@ Mad Max

@Bobbyaf
Well,I know nothing about prophecy. But I was baptised and raised Catholic. It took varying time spans but every member of my family voluntarily departed from Catholism, without being urged by a soul. God's been in the business of delivering people a long time. No doubt he is more than capable of leading individuals to Himself,including Catholics.

And others by the millions are likewise following suit, especially ever since the sex scandals that is still rocking the organization to date.

Well, if you're interested in seeing prophecy fulfilled in front of your very eyes I'd be glad to share some websites with you. In the mean time here is a prophecy video that you will definitely find interesting.

http://www.john1429.org/video/antichrist/Antichrist-128.html

Is persecuted a better word? So who were those bible-believing Christians who were burnt at the stake may I ask? Who were those Christians that were tied up in dungeons to rot for their faith? Who were those Christians who were torn apart on the racks? Who were those Christian mothers who had their unborn cut from their bodies? Who were those Christian children and wives who were fed with their father's flesh? Were they Roman Catholics? Listen carefully Lady you have not the slightest clue as to what God's true church went through during the middle ages. Now let me give you some biblical proof from John's words as to what God's church will pass through before reaching heaven:

Oh I am so glad you're asking this question. The answer is heretics, and no they didn't believe in the Bible, the Bible was not compiled at that time. Infact their belief was that Jesus wasn't God and man. It was either he was God or man, some said he was only God and never man, others said he wasn't God but only man.
Remember we're talking about before the Bible was put together, so how were they "Bible-believing" Christians when the Bible was not defined as the Bible at that time?

Those "persecuted" were the gnostics, agnostics, and such. It is a fact of history that the burning at the stake that took place was done by the Romans, and the Jews, and that those that were truly persecuted were the Catholics, yes that's right the Catholics. Get your facts correct mister.

By the way you noticed nothing was mentioned of Mary,

First of all this is not the only verse in the Bible. Just because she wasn't mentioned here doesn't mean that she wasn't mentioned at all in the Bible or the book of revelations. Mary was not mentioned here, because John had not seen her at the time. Notice that the apostles were in heaven, so much for no one is in heaven.

As was mentioned to you before that woman in prophecy means church, God's true church in this sense. It was shown clearly that for 1260 literal years which is symbolized by the expression time, and times, and half a time

And as usual, picking and quoting to suit yourself, what did that chapter say before this?
As was mentioned, that is the correct interpretation by the Catholic Church, but also remember as was mentioned to you that Mary is a type of the Church. Tell me that the ark of the covenant that is now a woman, who gives birth to the messiah could not be Mary, and then explain how it couldn't be Mary.

Have you ever heard of typology? Look it up.

The dragon represented pagan Rome which passed its authority to papal Rome. In other words the popes replaced the Caesars whose doctrines were rejected by the true church that was persecuted for not paying homage to edicts and dogmas. This LovePeddler which sits on top of the waters controls the nations today as it did then. This great apostate movement called the Roman Catholic church cannot hide because history is there to reveal what she did in the past, while prophecy is there to reveal what she intends to do in the future. Your own pope confessed to the persecutions

Ok now I see you like making claims, but here's something about claims you have to prove it, if you cannot prove it, then please know that you are a liar and are spreading false things. Prove to us that the Pagan Rome is the Papal Rome. And I mean bring us history and documents, not just random writings from uninformed anti-catholics. Bring unbias sources and prove your point.

No one is infallible but God. Not even the apostles claimed infallibility. As I have said before on more than one occasions, that God used people from the RCC to have collated and put together a canonized standard of the scriptures. If there were no scriptures there could have been no canonization in the first place, but that does change the fact that the RCC in general is an apostate movement.

Um the Church is infallible, Christ himself said so, he who abides in him will never loose his salvation, the Church is the body of Christ. The Pope is infallible, no not the Pope himself as just a man, but the Pope as the Vicar of Christ is infallible, the Keys to the Kingdom of heaven doesn't lead astray. God wouldn't give the Keys to the Kingdom of heaven to a man that will declare evil as the truth.

You have it backwards if there was no canonization there would be no scripture. It is only through canonization that we have scripture. If the Gospel of Matthew was not canonized you wouldn't call it scripture, if the book of Revelations wasn't canonized you wouldn't call it scripture. Paul wrote several other letters e.g the letter to the laodecians, they were not more or less important than the ones that we call scripture today but we do not call it scripture today, why? because it wasn't canonized. Canonization leads to scripture. Before canonizations these the books of the New Testament were not considered infallible and were not considered scripture, they were just letters that were written to communities, it was canonization that defined them as scripture. Get it in the proper order.

God would not use the devil and his agents to put together his Word that all people in all generations would consider infallible. Therefore the RCC is an agent of God's truth.

When St. Paul said that all scripture is given by inspiration of God what was he talking about? The parchments, and apostolic letters are all scriptures. Anything that is written is called scripture. I thought you knew that. The only difference is that these scriptures came about by inspiration. The minds of men were illuminated by God's Spirit to have written down what God inspired them to.

Um sir anything that is written IS NOT CALLED scripture. Do you call The Lord of the Rings scripture? Scripture is holy, my accounting textbook is not holy. It is not for a religious purpose and it is not authoritative.
The letters that Paul wrote that was not included in the Bible is not inspired? How so, did God inspire him when he wrote to the Corinthians and not to the Laodecians? Please explain.

I am not interested in what successors had to say. I only go by what inspired writers had to say by way of the scriptures.

And how do you know the successors were not inspired? God stops inspiring people to write things down? Did you know that these successors wrote as early as 70 AD? If their writing was included in the Bible you would consider it scripture and infallible?
How do you know the books of the Bible are truly inspired?
Why do you believe in the Bible?

On my part I don't believe that people after death go to heaven, or hell

Then where do they go to?

Notice something here, Paul used this example from the pagans in 1 Cor. 15:29, when he said, ", if the dead are not raised, then why are they baptized for the dead?" Paul did not say we.1 This is significant because the Christian church was not practicing baptism for the dead, but the pagans were.

1) Paul was not speaking of the Pagan people.
I will provide you with the preceeding passages that deal with the issue of resurrection of the dead.

It starts off at 1 Corinthians 15:12

12 But if Christ is preached as not raised from the dead, how can some among you say there is no resurrection of the dead?

Paul specifically points out that it is people from the Church in Corinth that are preaching so he is talking to the people.

13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then neither has Christ been raised

14 And if Christ has not been raised then empty is our preaching; empty, too your faith.

15 Then we are also false witnesses to God,, beacuse we testified against God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if in fact the dead were not raised.

16 For if the dead were not raised, neither has Christ been raised

17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is vain; you are still in your sins

18 Then those who have fallen asleep in Christ are perished

19 If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are the most pitiable people.

20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep

21 For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead came also through a human being

22 For just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life

23 but each one in proper order: Christ the firstfruits; then, at his coming, those who belong to Christ

24 then comes the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father, when he has destroyed every sovereignty and every authority and power

25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet

26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death

27 for "he subjected everything under his feet." But when it says that everything has been subjected, it is clear that it excludes the One who subjected everything to him.

28 When everything is subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the One who subjected everything to him, so that God may be all in all.

29 Otherwise what will people accomplish by having themselves baptize for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, then why are they having themselves baptized for them?

Paul was speaking to the Church about what people in the Church were preaching, it had nothing to do with paganism. Infact the baptism for the dead was used as a practical argument to prove that there is resurrection of the dead?

This was a practice among some Christians. The they he was referring to are the people in the Church who preached that there isn't resurrection. He is basically saying, how can they practice baptism for the dead if they don't believe the resurrection of the dead? These are Christians.

Pagans do not believe in the resurrection of Christ, and the dead, that's why they're Pagan and not Christian.

Again I tell you stop assuming that you are right. You believe that the practice of baptism for the dead was not done by the early christians, this verse proves you wrong. Try seeing what the Bible says, and stop seeing what you want to see. You have no proof that the early christians did not practice baptism for the dead, you just assume they wouldn't do that, you assume they would think and practice what you think and practice, what you think practice is wrong. In making that assumption, you miss their actual practices, stop assuming you are right.

The act of baptism is not salvivic. No one can be saved by baptism alone.

Not baptism of water alone, you need both baptism of water and baptism of the Spirit. You need both. Baptism of water washes away the sins, and then you receive the Spirit. Baptism requires the use of water and the work of the Spirit.

In the Jordan Jesus was baptised of the water and the Spirit, after being baptised of the water the dove descended upon him and annointed him as the Son of God.

Even the apostles were baptised of water and then of the Spirit.

In Acts 1:5 Jesus says to his apostles "for John baptised with water, but in a few days you will be baptised with the Holy Spirit"
Baptism is salvific and it is not of water alone, it is of both water and Spirit.

Jesus wouldn't have asked the apostles to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit if it wasn't needed and if it was just a symbolic ritual. There would be no point in it if it isn't slavific, Christ wouldn't have stressed it. He wouldn't have said unless a man be baptized of both water and Spirit he will not be saved, he speaks of two baptisms for salvation, he didn't speak of one as symbolic and the other for salvation, he spoke of both for a person to be saved, that is to enter the Kingdom of heaven.

Baptism is both of water and Spirit. Both are needed.

I prefer quoting from the KJV which says,

10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. 11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; 13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Actually it is pretty straight forward. Paul is talking about the gospel ministry that he is involved in. He is saying that those who come after him should take heed not to add what will not strengthen the ministry, and each addition's true colors will be revealed after being tested. He's not ruling out those failed cases because God uses difficult circumstances at times to save each and everyone of us.

And at what time will he be using difficult circumstances to save each and everyone of us? When will the true color's be revealed after testing. When will this testing take place?

The grammar didn't say that.

I am very glad that you are the one who posted that verse, so I will post exactly what you posted.

1 Peter 3:18-20
18 "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: 19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

Who is the he that went and preached to the spirits in prison?

There is only one Spirit of God that has been convicting men to follow God. What Peter was saying is that this same Spirit that quickened Christ, or as it were brought back life to Christ, was the same Spirit that appealed to the antediluvians.

Ok so why did you say of the past? In saying that you reference another spirit.

Bear in mind that in other verses Peter made mention of the world that was destroyed by a flood. He referenced that event to show that God's Spirit that appealed to the people before the flood is the same Spirit that quickened Christ from the dead. Logically Jesus was not yet manifested in the flesh at the time of the flood, but His Spirit was very much apart of plan of salvation in convicting the world then and now to repent

Oh I am not disputing that the ones in prison were the people that died back in the day, infact that is my point. How is it that they were able to be saved, what and where is this prison that they were in?

You see the bible does not and cannot contradict itself. The teaching of Christ and His apostles clearly state that after death comes the judgment. There can be no more repentance in the grave. Why would Paul say in quoting the scriptures, "today if you hear my voice harden not your hearts" "Now is the day of salvation" if he knew that if a person died whose sins were not forgiven by God, could be placed in purgatory to be given another chance.

The whole idea of the teachings of Christ and His apostles/Disciples was to call people to repentance before it was too late.

Ok I see the misconception is that you think that in purgatory one can repent. No that is not the concept of purgatory at all. Purgatory is for those who are definitely going to heaven. It is not for those who did not repent and accept Christ. Those in purgatory have already accepted Christ.
So you see it is the teaching of Christ and his apostles.

The issue is, Is there a place that the dead go to that is not hell or heaven? The answer is yes, there is such a place, and it is that place that Christ preached when he descended unto the dead, sheol. That place is what we call purgatory.

See I told you you're fighting your own belief.

The 8 people mentioned were Noah, his wife, his 3 sons and their wives who were the only righteous ones left from the flood. My argument was not addressing them, but those who refused to enter the ark of safety

Ok I see we're both misunderstanding each other here. My argument is addressing them, because the Bible is addressing them. Now the questions is, if they were in "prison" as the Bible states, where and what is this prison?
This prison cannot be hell, no one can get out of there, it isn't heaven because they are in prison, heaven would not be referred to as prison, and Christ preached to them, there would be no need of preaching to those in heaven, they already made it whoo hoo. So what is this prison?

And that is because they were saved from the flood, as well as when they died. They were righteous before the Lord.

I agree, the Catholic Church agrees, but we know they weren't in heaven or hell, so where were they?

I'd advise you to take a serious look at what the RCC has done in adding and subtracting from the very bible they canonized. All those things that we have pointed out to you have fallen on deaf ears it seems.

I will repeat what I have said multiple times on this forum. All Catholics and non-catholics believe what the RCC teaches, the difference is that Catholics are aware that they believe what they RCC teaches and the non-catholics are not aware that they believe what the RCC teaches.

So what say you now that you see that you believe what the RCC teaches?

na wa o see textbook. How you people cope is amazing . . .

And others by the millions are likewise following suit, especially ever since the sex scandals that is still rocking the organization to date.

Sweetie you might want to check again the Church is growing, evangelicals are flocking to the Church.

People are realising that the RCC has always taught what Christ and his apostles teaches, and what they believe too. They realise that they're the ones who have the wrong impression of the RCC. They realise that what they thought the RCC teaches, the RCC doesn't teach at all.

I provided a link about a former preacher named Scott Hahn who was doing the exact same thing you're doing, and was trying to "save" Catholics and expose the Church and then ended up finding out that all evidence of the truth points to the RCC, and now he is one of the best Catholic apologetics you will ever find.
Another one that I can tell you of is Alex Jones, who was also a preacher, and embarked on the same journey as you, and when he discovered the truth, he told his congregation and most of them abandoned him.

Here's his story. Watch and listen to it, and see why he gave up his own ministry, that has got to be hard. Your mind may not be changed but you will certainly get a lot from it. If you feel you know the truth, watch it, it wouldn't affect you any kind of way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MvfAJ7ap8s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0m7ViOYaQNI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNfhDGRJFSI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lkg29C5MUWs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v34QEwhiyH4&feature=related

majority of those converting to the Catholic Church are preachers and theologians, especially when they set out on a journey to save Catholics. But really one has to be open to the truth, the Holy Spirit.

It takes decades for some to come to grip with it, they struggle and fight it, but truth always prevails, like Christ said the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, and "If they persecuted me, how much more will they persecute you"

There is a reason the devil wants you to think the Church is the devil, it doesn't want you to know the truth. But if you are really a truthful person, you will become Catholic when you see the truth. I did.

@Lady, I'm enjoying your write-ups,

@Bobbyaff

Is persecuted a better word? So who were those bible-believing Christians who were burnt at the stake may I ask? Who were those Christians that were tied up in dungeons to rot for their faith? Who were those Christians who were torn apart on the racks?. . . . Who were those Christian children and wives who were fed with their father's flesh? . . . . Listen carefully Lady you have not the slightest clue as to what God's true church went through during the middle ages.

Here we go again, Bobbyaf, grave sins were committed by members of the Catholic Church and we continually pray for their souls and the souls of the persecuted.  The Blessed Pope John Paul II has apologized on there behalf and has asked those who have been affected to find forgiveness and reconciliation.  Likewise, atrocities have been leveled on Catholic Christians by our brother non-catholic Christians during those same times.  No one is innocent and I will ask you to stop preaching to the choir about “your so called loss” because of the past transgressions of members of the Catholic Church.  You talk about the persecutions of members in Gods true Church, but yet you have not yet identified what Church tradition you follow (e.i., the faith tradition you most readily identify with; and yes I said faith tradition).  What Church do you belong to?  If I were to guess, I would guess Jehovah’s Witness or Seventh day Adventist.  Because only those churches have vivid imaginations and seemingly bend the Bible so that it could fit their wild Bible exegesis.

Now let me give you some biblical proof from John's words as to what God's church will pass through before reaching heaven:

Revelation 7:9-14
"9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; 10 And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb. 11 And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God, 12 Saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen. 13 And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they? 14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."

By the way you noticed nothing was mentioned of Mary,   

My friend, these are the saints (holy ones) in heaven.  Are you saying that Mary is not in heaven (the Mother of God the Son) because her name is not mentioned in that passage?   Why wouldn’t the Blessed Virgin Mary be in heaven?  Your hate for all things Catholic has even biased you against the Mother of our Lord.

Revelation 12:13,14 say, "13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child. 14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent."

As was mentioned to you before that woman in prophecy means church, God's true church in this sense. It was shown clearly that for 1260 literal years which is symbolized by the expression time, and times, and half a time.

In Catholic theology the woman in Revelation 12 is part of what we call fusion imagery/polyvalent (e.i., when one symbol is composed of elements from several different things) symbolism that is found in the book.  She has four referents: Israel, the Church, Eve, and Mary.  We would not disagree with you about ‘the woman’ symbolizing the Church.  But the Catholic understanding is fuller and broader. 

The Woman is Israel:
Because she is associated with the sun, the moon, and twelve stars.  John takes these symbols from the book of Genesis 37:9–11.  In the passage Joseph (the patriach) has a dream of the sun and moon (symbolizing his father and mother) and stars (representing his brothers), which bow down to him (side not: notice how bowing down to Joseph is NOT a sign of worship, but is one of showing honor to whom honor is due).  Taken together, the sun, moon, and twelve stars symbolize the people of Israel.

The Woman is the Church:
Because, as 12:17 tells us, "the rest of her offspring" are those who bear witness to Jesus, making them Christians.  As Christians we are to follow the teachings of Christ by preaching and spreading the good news (the Gospel).  We are to baptize believers into the Church thereby making them members of the Church.  In the New Testament, Christ, the Bridegroom, has sacrificially and lovingly chosen the Church to be His bride (Ephesians 5:25-27).

The Woman is Eve
Because she is part of the three-way conflict also involving her Seed and the Dragon, who is identified with the ancient serpent (the one from Eden) in 20:2. This mirrors the conflict in Genesis 3:15 between Eve, the serpent, and her unborn seed—which in turn is a symbol of the conflict between Mary, Satan, and Jesus.  Catholics also call this passage the Protoevangelium (the First Gospel).

Genesis 3:15

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

The Woman is the Blessed Virgin Mary
Because she is the mother of Jesus, the child who will rule the nations with a rod of iron (19:11–16).

Because the Woman is a four-way symbol, different aspects of the narrative apply to different referents.  We call this typology, which is basically a system of interpretation by which certain events, images, and personages could be understood as prophetic ‘types’ or ‘figures’ foreshadowing the life of Christ. 

Like Mary, she is pictured as being in heaven and she flies (mirroring Mary’s Assumption). Like the Church, she is persecuted by the Devil after the Ascension of Christ. Like Israel, she experiences great trauma as the Messiah is brought forth (figuratively) from the nation. And like Eve, it is her (distant) seed with which the serpent has his primary conflict.  Conversely, portions of the narrative do not apply to each referent.  Eve did not ascend to heaven.  And the Church did not bring forth the Messiah (rather, the Messiah brought forth his Church).

As far as your claim about the ‘time, and times, and a half time’ being 1260 literal years I addressed this earlier.  Please stop putting your wrong interpretations before what the bible actually says.  If you believe it is 1260 literals years prove it using the Bible.

How did the prophet say she would be persecuted? 15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.

Water in prophecy means people in accordance with Revelation 17:15 "And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the LovePeddler sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues."

The dragon represented pagan Rome which passed its authority to papal Rome. In other words the popes replaced the Caesars whose doctrines were rejected by the true church that was persecuted for not paying homage to edicts and dogmas. This LovePeddler which sits on top of the waters controls the nations today as it did then. This great apostate movement called the Roman Catholic church cannot hide because history is there to reveal what she did in the past, while prophecy is there to reveal what she intends to do in the future. Your own pope confessed to the persecutions.

You are correct in interpreting this passage as foreshadowing the persecution of Christians.  How you come to the conclusion that Pagan Rome passed its authority to the Catholic Church of Rome is still yet to be proven.  Please prove to us that Pagan Rome passed its authority to the Church of Rome.  And please provide credible sources and not anti-catholic website sources.  My friend, history is there to prove the truth. . . .the Catholic Church as nothing to hide.  Our pope apologized for the transgressions of members of the Catholic Church.  I feel that was a very Christian thing to do.  Yet, you still have not posted anything regarding the persecutions that Catholics went through (in many respects are currently experiencing) during those same times.

No one is infallible but God. Not even the apostles claimed infallibility. As I have said before on more than one occasions, that God used people from the RCC to have collated and put together a canonized standard of the scriptures. If there were no scriptures there could have been no canonization in the first place, but that does change the fact that the RCC in general is an apostate movement.

Uh, my friend, for the apostles to write scripture they had to be infallible otherwise the scriptures wouldn’t be the word of God.  The Church has to be infallible for them to discern the canon of scripture.  I think you may be misunderstanding the concept of infallibility.  The only way one can be infallible is with the help of God.  The apostles were infallible when they wrote the New Testament.  The apostles were infallible when they were preaching the Gospel.  Infallibility does not mean impeccability (e.i., impeccability is the absence of sin. Catholics believe this to be an attribute of God (logically God cannot sin, it would mean that he would act against his own will and nature) and therefore also an attribute of Christ).

Infallibility is not the absence of sin.  The apostles were with sin, but taught infallibly.  Nor is it a charism that belongs only to the pope.  It does not mean they cannot make mistakes.  Indeed, infallibility also belongs to the body of bishops as a whole, when, in doctrinal unity with the pope, they solemnly teach a doctrine as true. We have this from Jesus himself, who promised the apostles and their successors the bishops, the magisterium of the Church: "He who hears you hears me" (Luke 10:16), and "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven" (Matt. 18:18).  You may disagree, fine, but this teaching is rooted in scripture.

When St. Paul said that all scripture is given by inspiration of God what was he talking about? The parchments, and apostolic letters are all scriptures. Anything that is written is called scripture. I thought you knew that. The only difference is that these scriptures came about by inspiration. The minds of men were illuminated by God's Spirit to have written down what God inspired them to.

Are you saying that every letter that St. Paul wrote in regards to the faith is scripture?  I would have you know that there are letters attributed to St. Paul that are not part of the canon of the Bible.  Are you saying that those letters are inspired and should be considered scripture?  The same applies to all the apostles. . . .are you saying that all the letters that the apostles wrote should be considered scripture.  If you answer anything, I would like for you to answer this.

On my part I don't believe that people after death go to heaven, or hell. I won't necessarily dwell on that aspect of things at this time in point though. I will deal directly with 1 Corinthians 15:9. With that said it is extremely important to read Paul's words in context. It is also important to realize that Corinth was riddled with pagan concepts that tended to influence Christians just like how stuff can influence Christians today.

I believe Lady has addressed this passage.  And quite frankly, I really don’t want to hear your personal opinion of where we go after death.  If you can prove using the Bible where we go after death, by all means, prove it.  But keep you personal feelings and assumptions to one side and what the Bible teaches to another.  Personally I’ll stick to what the Bible says and what the Church has taught and believed since the earliest days.

The act of baptism is not salvivic. No one can be saved by baptism alone.

I think you misunderstand what Baptism is. In John 3:5 Jesus says “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.”  When a Catholic says that he has been "born again," he refers to the transformation that God’s grace accomplished in him during baptism.  The term “born again” does not totally convey what is happening and is not a good translation of the Greek, gennatha anothen, in John 3:5.  A better translation is “born from above”. 

The context of Jesus’ statements in John 3 makes it clear that he was referring to water baptism. Shortly before Jesus teaches Nicodemus about the necessity and regenerating effect of baptism, he himself was baptized by John the Baptist, and the circumstances are striking: Jesus goes down into the water, and as he is baptized, the heavens open, the Holy Spirit descends upon him in the form of a dove, and the voice of God the Father speaks from heaven, saying, "This is my beloved Son" (cf. Matt. 3:13–17; Mark 1:9–11; Luke 3:21–22; John 1:30–34).  This scene gives us a graphic depiction of what happens at baptism:  We are baptized with water, symbolizing our dying with Christ (Rom. 6:3) and our rising with Christ to the newness of life (Rom. 6:4–5); we receive the gift of sanctifying grace and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:27); and we are adopted as God’s sons (Rom. 8:15–17).

Acts 22:16 - Ananias tells Paul, "arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins," even though Paul was converted directly by Jesus Christ. This proves that Paul's acceptance of Jesus as personal Lord and Savior was not enough to be forgiven of his sin and saved. The sacrament of baptism is required.

Acts 22:16 - further, Ananias' phrase "wash away" comes from the Greek word "apolouo." "Apolouo" means an actual cleansing which removes sin. It is not a symbolic covering up of sin. Even though Jesus chose Paul directly in a heavenly revelation, Paul had to be baptized to have his sins washed away.

Rom. 6:4 - in baptism, we actually die with Christ so that we, like Him, might be raised to newness of life. This means that, by virtue of our baptism, our sufferings are not in vain. They are joined to Christ and become efficacious for our salvation.

The 8 people mentioned were Noah, his wife, his 3 sons and their wives who were the only righteous ones left from the flood. My argument was not addressing them, but those who refused to enter the ark of safety.

The question is not who are the 8 people. . . .the question is where did Jesus go?  And the Bible clearly states where he goes and why.

1 Peter 3:18-20
18 "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: 19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

davidylan:

na wa o see textbook. How you people cope is amazing . . .

I am practising for my dissertation, I am hoping you will be a good christian and encourage me to practice writing dissertations so I can do well ehn

Here we go again, Bobbyaf, grave sins were committed by members of the Catholic Church and we continually pray for their souls and the souls of the persecuted. The Blessed Pope John Paul II has apologized on there behalf and has asked those who have been affected to find forgiveness and reconciliation.

No, both leaders and members committed those evils, and they prospered with it for over 1000 years. Besides, what can an apology do at this point in time to bring back life to those precious souls? How could the true church have done such wicked acts in the name of Christ has been a puzzle to true born-again Christians. Christ never called His church to persecute anyone who weren't prepared to accept the gospel, but He did warn that His church would be persecuted for His name sake. If nothing else this proves the RCC an apostate and counterfeit movement.

Likewise, atrocities have been leveled on Catholic Christians by our brother non-catholic Christians during those same times.

Give the time and place if you please, and the circumstances that might have logically led to their persecutions. When you're done doing that I will give you mine. Besides, there can be no comparison between what Catholic leadership and members did to innocent bible-believing Christians who posed no threats at all, to Catholics who reaped their rightful judgments.

No one is innocent and I will ask you to stop preaching to the choir about “your so called loss” because of the past transgressions of members of the Catholic Church. You talk about the persecutions of members in Gods true Church, but yet you have not yet identified what Church tradition you follow

That is because all you're capable of doing is trivializing the loss. Do you not recall the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre in France? Did you know that the orders to kill the protestants was given by the court spiritual adviser which incidentally was a Jesuit priest. Why kill innocent people? This is the reason why, The RCC had gotten so much property over the hundreds of years through deception, and had built up so much influence in France, but much to the recession of knowledge and inspiration of the country. Gross darkness had fallen upon those regions, including France, that were subject to Popery. That is why in that era it was called the dark ages.

This was the result of the concerns of the RC leadership, Suddenly—and without warning—the devilish work commenced. Beginning at Paris, the French soldiers and the Roman Catholic clergy fell upon the unarmed people, and blood flowed like a river throughout the entire country. Men, women, and children fell in heaps before the mobs and the bloodthirsty troops. In one week, almost 100,100 Protestants perished. The rivers of France were so filled with corpses that for many months no fish were eaten. In the valley of the Loire, wolves came down from the hills to feel upon the decaying bodies of Frenchmen. The list of massacres was as endless as the list of the dead!

Yet you have the audacity and gaul to talk about atrocities committed against Catholics, as if you are not the least educated to say why. Persecutions can come upon anyone for different reasons. That is why I ask you to name the time and place so that history and geography will justify why they were persecuted.

(e.i., the faith tradition you most readily identify with; and yes I said faith tradition). What Church do you belong to? If I were to guess, I would guess Jehovah’s Witness or Seventh day Adventist. Because only those churches have vivid imaginations and seemingly bend the Bible so that it could fit their wild Bible exegesis.

And I guess the above-mentioned organizations wrote history, huh? Hahahaha!

My friend, these are the saints (holy ones) in heaven. Are you saying that Mary is not in heaven (the Mother of God the Son) because her name is not mentioned in that passage? Why wouldn’t the Blessed Virgin Mary be in heaven? Your hate for all things Catholic has even biased you against the Mother of our Lord.

They are saints all right, but none that were canonized by popes, and none that are prayed to and asked for intercession like the pagans did, but these were those who came out of great tribulation, some of whom were persecuted by your organization. These were the redeemed that were taken to heaven at the 2nd return of Jesus Christ.

As for Mary being in heaven shouldn't it even strike you that the very 12th chapter of Revelation doesn't even mention her name? Such an important woman! Such a highly exalted woman! "The Mother of God!" Wow. It has not occured to you either that a few verse down in the same chapter pictures this woman still on the earth being persecuted by the dragon.

How could you people use the first wondrous object that John saw above the earth in vision, and assume that that means she is in heaven, and not agree with this verse which I will quote below that she didn't go to heaven after her child went to heaven? John also saw this in vision too, "6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days."

Did you notice that poster? She went straight into the wilderness right after she had her baby. She had a place prepared of God it says, and she was fed for how long? 1260 days or in prophetic terms 1260 years. Got that poster? 1260 years God's church dwelt in the wilderness, while the counterfeit church flourished. That is what I am talking about. The word of God said that the beast in Revelation 13, or little horn as found in Daniel 7 would rule for a certain time period, and history has made that abundantly clear what that religio-political organization is.

CONCLUSION! MARY IS ASLEEP IN HER GRAVE AWAITING THE LAST TRUMP OF THE ARCHANGEL.

You say my hate for all things catholic has made me bias, and I say your love for all things pagan has clouded your spiritual eyesight. My words may seem graphic and strong, but they are true. The truth has an uncanny way of making people think, and I am sure that you Catholics have been thinking twice since you began reading these posts, correct?

In Catholic theology the woman in Revelation 12 is part of what we call fusion imagery/polyvalent (e.i., when one symbol is composed of elements from several different things) symbolism that is found in the book. She has four referents: Israel, the Church, Eve, and Mary. We would not disagree with you about ‘the woman’ symbolizing the Church. But the Catholic understanding is fuller and broader.

The Woman is Israel:
Because she is associated with the sun, the moon, and twelve stars. John takes these symbols from the book of Genesis 37:9–11. In the passage Joseph (the patriach) has a dream of the sun and moon (symbolizing his father and mother) and stars (representing his brothers), which bow down to him (side not: notice how bowing down to Joseph is NOT a sign of worship, but is one of showing honor to whom honor is due). Taken together, the sun, moon, and twelve stars symbolize the people of Israel.

The Woman is the Church:
Because, as 12:17 tells us, "the rest of her offspring" are those who bear witness to Jesus, making them Christians. As Christians we are to follow the teachings of Christ by preaching and spreading the good news (the Gospel). We are to baptize believers into the Church thereby making them members of the Church. In the New Testament, Christ, the Bridegroom, has sacrificially and lovingly chosen the Church to be His bride (Ephesians 5:25-27).

The Woman is Eve
Because she is part of the three-way conflict also involving her Seed and the Dragon, who is identified with the ancient serpent (the one from Eden) in 20:2. This mirrors the conflict in Genesis 3:15 between Eve, the serpent, and her unborn seed—which in turn is a symbol of the conflict between Mary, Satan, and Jesus. Catholics also call this passage the Protoevangelium (the First Gospel).

Sounds all fancy and nice, but still doesn't answer why the woman was left in the wilderness in the earth for 1260 years.

The Woman is the Blessed Virgin Mary
Because she is the mother of Jesus, the child who will rule the nations with a rod of iron (19:11–16).

As was said the woman symbolizes God's pure church.

Because the Woman is a four-way symbol, different aspects of the narrative apply to different referents. We call this typology, which is basically a system of interpretation by which certain events, images, and personages could be understood as prophetic ‘types’ or ‘figures’ foreshadowing the life of Christ.

This is catholic mumbo jumbo for trying to deceive the congregants.

Like Mary, she is pictured as being in heaven and she flies (mirroring Mary’s Assumption). Like the Church, she is persecuted by the Devil after the Ascension of Christ. Like Israel, she experiences great trauma as the Messiah is brought forth (figuratively) from the nation. And like Eve, it is her (distant) seed with which the serpent has his primary conflict. Conversely, portions of the narrative do not apply to each referent. Eve did not ascend to heaven. And the Church did not bring forth the Messiah (rather, the Messiah brought forth his Church).

If there were no Hebrew people through whom God established the promise, there could have been no Messiah. The church through different dispensations existed long before Jesus incarnated. Jesus was symbolized in their worship format. The word church means "the called out ones", and in every generation God always had His "Called-out-Ones" with whom He deposited His divine oracles. How else would an evil and adulturous generation have come to know The Creator of heaven and earth? In fact from the moment our first parents sinned God spoke of the plan of salvation to Adam and Eve, telling them of the conflict to expect between good and evil, and that one day through the church, or woman, the Messiah would come to destroy the works of Satan that serpent.

As far as your claim about the ‘time, and times, and a half time’ being 1260 literal years I addressed this earlier. Please stop putting your wrong interpretations before what the bible actually says. If you believe it is 1260 literals years prove it using the Bible.

All bible-believing Christians have used the day-year principle for prophecy studies. If the principle applies to some prophecies, it applies to all, including the one revealing your organization. When God called Ezekiel to prophesy against Israel he appointed him 1 day for a year.

I will go into more details next time.

@Lady, I'm enjoying your write-ups,

Why thank you, I am also enjoying yours, I was wondering where you were though.
Thanks for clarifying the woman in Revelations well for Bobbyaf, I was seriously trying to figure out how to explain typology and all that to him, but I doubt he'll get it. Dude is hell bent on being blind. May God removed the scales from his eyes as he did the blind man.

Give the time and place if you please, and the circumstances that might have logically led to their persecutions. When you're done doing that I will give you mine. Besides, there can be no comparison between what Catholic leadership and members did to innocent bible-believing Christians who posed no threats at all, to Catholics who reaped their rightful judgments.

Please go and do your research, and I already provided you with examples. You guys persecute us till this day.

That is because all you're capable of doing is trivializing the loss. Do you not recall the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre in France? Did you know that the orders to kill the protestants was given by the court spiritual adviser which incidentally was a Jesuit priest. Why kill innocent people?

How do you know they were innocent, and haven't innocent Catholic blood being shed by protestants. Read on Henry VIII and Elizabeth.

Yet you have the audacity and gaul to talk about atrocities committed against Catholics, as if you are not the least educated to say why. Persecutions can come upon anyone for different reasons. That is why I ask you to name the time and place so that history and geography will justify why they were persecuted.

YES WE HAVE THE AUDACITY TO TALK ABOUT ATROCITIES COMMITED AGAINST CATHOLICS, WHY WERE CATHOLICS PERSECUTED? IT IS BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY BELIEVE?
WE ACTUALLY ACKNOWLEDGE THE TRUTH THAT THE CHURCH HAS DONE WRONG IN THE PAST EVEN IF IT IS JUSTIFIED, AND WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT PROTESTANTS TOO HAVE DONE WRONG TO CATHOLICS AND NO THEY WEREN'T JUSTIFIED. HENRY VIII KILLED CATHOLICS BECAUSE HE WANTED TO SLEEP WITH A WOMAN, TELL ME IF THAT IS REASON ENOUGH TO KILL PEOPLE. HIS DAUGHTER ELIZABETH KILLED CATHOLICS BECAUSE SHE WANTED TO CARRY ON HER FATHER'S LEGACY, TELL ME THAT IS REASON ENOUGH TO KILL PEOPLE.

GET THE HATRED OUT OF YOUR HEART AND THEN YOU WILL SEE THE TRUTH. YOU FEED YOURSELF WITH HATEFUL THINGS AND THEN YOU COME HERE AND ACT HOLIER THAN THOU. NONSENSE.

And I guess the above-mentioned organizations wrote history, huh? Hahahaha!

The history that they want you to believe? Absolutely, did they tell you about the Protestants killing Catholics? If they didn't they weren't telling you the full history.

They are saints all right, but none that were canonized by popes, and none that are prayed to and asked for intercession like the pagans did, but these were those who came out of great tribulation, some of whom were persecuted by your organization. These were the redeemed that were taken to heaven at the 2nd return of Jesus Christ.

They were canonized by the Pope, keep up with your delusions, we can all tell you want to believe, so continue and God will show you the truth one day.

As for Mary being in heaven shouldn't it even strike you that the very 12th chapter of Revelation doesn't even mention her name? Such an important woman! Such a highly exalted woman! "The Mother of God!" Wow. It has not occured to you either that a few verse down in the same chapter pictures this woman still on the earth being persecuted by the dragon.

None of the apostles were mentioned by name yet we know they're the elders sitting upong the thrones in the temple of God. Seriously dude, please tell me you're not that stupid.
The woman is not still on the earth still being persecuted by the dragon, her children are on earth being persecuted by the dragon. Get it right. The dragon waged war against her seed.

How could you people use the first wondrous object that John saw above the earth in vision, and assume that that means she is in heaven, and not agree with this verse which I will quote below that she didn't go to heaven after her child went to heaven? John also saw this in vision too, "6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days."

Ok seriously he explained all this did you even take the time to read it?
Is it that you just can't accept that the woman could be Mary?
The woman is the Church, she is also Mary.
Also because the sig that appears in revelations also corresponds to the sign spoken of in Isaiah.

Isaiah said, "The Lord shall give you a sign, a virgin shall give birth" it corresponds to the sign in revelations which says "A sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun with the moon under her feet."

The sign in Isaiah is Mary, the sign in revelations has to be Mary. Both women give birth to the messiah, who is the mother of the messiah?

Ok let me take this one by one, verse by verse.

Revelations 12:1 And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars: 2 And being with child, she cried travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered
5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne.

Who is this woman?
Who is the son?

Did you notice that poster? She went straight into the wilderness right after she had her baby. She had a place prepared of God it says, and she was fed for how long? 1260 days or in prophetic terms 1260 years. Got that poster? 1260 years God's church dwelt in the wilderness, while the counterfeit church flourished. That is what I am talking about. The word of God said that the beast in Revelation 13, or little horn as found in Daniel 7 would rule for a certain time period, and history has made that abundantly clear what that religio-political organization is.

Ok so why is the "counterfeit" church still flourishing? where is the real church? which church is the real church? when did the protestant reformation take place? does that amount to 1260 years?

You say my hate for all things catholic has made me bias, and I say your love for all things pagan has clouded your spiritual eyesight. My words may seem graphic and strong, but they are true. The truth has an uncanny way of making people think, and I am sure that you Catholics have been thinking twice since you began reading these posts, correct?

um the truth always seem unreal, the truth is accused of being in unity with the devil, remember Christ was also accused of using devilish powers.

Sounds all fancy and nice, but still doesn't answer why the woman was left in the wilderness in the earth for 1260 years.

prophetic term doesn't say that days are years. i don't know how you managed to covince yourself of that, but whatever floats your boat.

If there were no Hebrew people through whom God established the promise, there could have been no Messiah. The church through different dispensations existed long before Jesus incarnated. Jesus was symbolized in their worship format. The word church means "the called out ones", and in every generation God always had His "Called-out-Ones" with whom He deposited His divine oracles. How else would an evil and adulturous generation have come to know The Creator of heaven and earth? In fact from the moment our first parents sinned God spoke of the plan of salvation to Adam and Eve, telling them of the conflict to expect between good and evil, and that one day through the church, or woman, the Messiah would come to destroy the works of Satan that serpent

There are types of Church (typology), however, Christ's church was not established until after Christ's crucifixion, so how did the Church give birth to Christ? If Christ's church existed before, there would have been no reason for him to come and establish his church?

All bible-believing Christians have used the day-year principle for prophecy studies. If the principle applies to some prophecies, it applies to all, including the one revealing your organization. When God called Ezekiel to prophesy against Israel he appointed him 1 day for a year.

I will go into more details next time.

And all "bible-believing" christians have proven themselves wrong time and time again. We're still waiting for the "real" church to emerge, it's been 2000 years now, way past 1260, what happened?