Are Catholics Lost?

Comment: It is amazing to me how lost Catholics are. Nothing but repetition and useless prayers. Doing things with no soul, just for the sake of doing them.

BFHU: Wow! How are you able to judge the hearts of Catholics? “

I Cor: 13:1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.2If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.
3And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.

John 13:35
” By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”

Comment: “Let’s say the hail mary 50 times.” Not scriptural, just tradition and made up stuff that nobody needs to do. Why not just follow the bible?

BFHU: Are not all prayers “made up stuff” so to speak? When you pray do you ever use your own words to pray?
We do follow the Bible. Nothing in our faith contradicts it. Our Faith only contradicts Protest-antism

Comment: It doesn’t say, “thou must say 50 hail mary’s” in the bible, so why do it?

BFHU: It is a Biblical prayer for the most part and what is not in scripture is doctrinal.

Hail Mary full of grace blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.

Luke 1:28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

Luke 1:42
And she cried out with a loud voice and said, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!

Holy Mary, Mother of God pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death.

This part of the prayer is doctrinal. Jesus was God. Mary was His mother. Therefore, Mary was the Mother of God. We are sinners. Mary is alive in Heaven and part of the Body of Christ. We are to pray for one another so we ask Mary to Pray for us now and at the hour of our death, lest Satan tempt us to sin mortally and thereby win our soul for Hell.

Comment: Why not pray as Jesus prayed, do as Jesus did and stop inventing stuff that isn’t biblical? Who cares if the bible doesn’t forbid it, just stop doing it.

BFHU:We pray the Our Father at every mass. Are all of your prayers straight out of the Bible? On what authority do you command Catholics to do what you say?

Comment: There is absolutely no reason to pray to Mary or any other saint. God knows our situation. God is omnipotent and omnipresent. He is all seeing and all knowing and he knows what we need before we even ask.

BFHU: That is all very true. However, He seems to always work through human beings for some reason. Therefore, James tells us:

James 5:16
Therefore, confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another so that you may be healed The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much.

Your suggestion that we don’t need to pray b/c God already knows everything contradicts scripture

I Thess. 5:17 pray without ceasing;

Matthew 7:7 [Prayer and the Golden Rule ] ” Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

Matthew 17:21” But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting

Even Jesus prayed to His Father, and He, Jesus, was God,

Luke 6:12[ Choosing the Twelve ] It was at this time that He went off to the mountain to pray, and He spent the whole night in prayer

Comment: There is no reason or no basis in scripture for anybody to ask anybody but God through Christ.


James 5:16
Therefore, confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another so that you may be healed The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much.

Comment: And I also must add that if the bible doesn’t say anything that forbids prayer for the dead, but doesn’t say anything telling people to pray for the dead, then why do it at all? The bible doesn’t specifically forbid praying to a head of lettuce either, but that doesn’t mean that it’s okay to pray to a head of lettuce.

BFHU: The Bible does tell us to “pray for one another.” This does not exclude our asking for others to intercede on our behalf to God. Therefore, there is nothing wrong about praying for one another and not each one only praying to God by himself, for himself. The members of the Body of Christ pray for one another. Mary and the Saints are members of the Body of Christ. They do not need our prayers because they are in Heaven but we need prayer. So we ask them to pray for us. Simple as that.

Comment: Follow scripture. Don’t follow the catechism which has butchered the ten commandments which forbids idolatry. Follow the bible as it was meant to be followed. You don’t need a priest to tell you what is right and what is wrong. God’s scripture is right there and the answers are there, just read it and you will see the truth.

BFHU: We do follow the Bible. We do not worship Idols. That is a Protestant tradition-that Catholics worship idols. Charity, please.

Comment: Catholics, if you don’t believe me about the Catholic butchering of the Ten Commandments, I implore you to read the ten commandments of the bible and then compare them to what is in the Catechism. Can you tell me what happened to commandment NUMBER TWO?

BFHU: We simply number them differently. And we numbered them that way long before the Protestants numbered them the way that they do to specifically try to bolster their contention that Catholics worship idols.
Please see my post–>Why Did the Catholic Church DROP the Commandment about Idolatry?

17 Responses

  1. Ricardo: With regards to the 10 Commandments, you wrote: “We simply number them differently.”

    So, ergo, the Catholic institution changes the Word of God to suit their own world view in an attempt to fit the unlimited God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob into their own box.

    BFHU: No, that would be impossible. We have not changed the word of God. The Catholic Church has numbered the 10 Commandments like this for centuries. The Protestants chose to renumber them. But both ways are legitimate. If you read Ex. 20 You will see they are not numbered. It is up to the reader to get 10 commandments out of 16 verses. How would you do that? Please read my post–>Why Did the Catholic Church DROP the Commandment about Idolatry?

    Ricardo It’s funny how the mediator of this site uses Luther as a constant crutch throughout all of these pages of content.


    Ricardo Luther did this, Luther did that, thus, the Catholic church is right.

    BFHU: That is not to prove the Catholic Church right. It is to show Protestants that their hero who founded the Protestant “Reformation” (Really Rebellion) had surprising things to say and believed things anathema to evolved Protestants. This gives the lie to the Protestant “truths” that are not so eternal as many would like to believe.

    RicardoIn truth, Luther was just as big of an anti-Semite as any member of the Catholic hierarchy who chose to adjust the Hebrew scriptures to suit their own needs; by “simply” changing/altering the Word of God, the Catholic institution reveals itself and its motives to be no different from that of the Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Muslims, Whomever “simply” changes the Word of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to benefit from and glorify themselves.

    BFHU:You have made an assertion without any evidence to back it up. What or which scriptures do you think the Catholic Church has changed/adjusted/ altered? Your failure to produce them will prove that you just committed the sin of slander.

    RicardoThis isn’t a Luther/Catholic/Western European/Eastern European story – this is a story of how God brought Salvation (Y’Shua) to all of mankind through His special relationship with the Jews – remember them?

    BFHU: Of course we remember Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. He comes to us at every mass at every Catholic Church in every city, in every country around the world. We love and thank Jesus for His bountiful Mercy.

    RicardoThe Word’s not supposed to adjust to you – you’re supposed to adjust yourself to the Word -i.e., the Logos, i.e., Jehovah Shalom, Himself. We’re to put ourselves under His light, not vice-versa.

    BFHU: Could not agree more.

    RicardoThe 10 Commandments were given 3,500 years ago in what we today call the Middle East, and they need to be understood and studied within that context.


    RicardoThey are not to be studied under your White, Western-European context of 2,000-2,500 years after the fact when the Roman church made its power play, so to speak, to set itself up as supreme over all of the other churches of the early community (i.e. Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, etc.).

    BFHU: Historically, all the churches you mention, patriarchal churches, submitted to the authority of the Bishop of Rome. You cannot change history just b/c you don’t like it or agree with it. Jesus Himself made Peter the first among equals. Peter was given the Keys of the Kingdom and Jesus promised to build His Church on Peter. Thus, the apostles recognized Peter’s authority and ever after it has been so as the primacy of Peter has been handed down from one generation to the next in the person we call our Pope.

    RicardoWho or what gave the Catholic institution the authority to “simply” change the Word of God to fit its own theology?

    BFHU: We have not changed the Word of God one bit. We have interpreted it same for 2000 years. It was the Protestant churches, who cut themselves off from the Church Jesus founded who interpret the Word of God differently than the Catholic Church and differently than other Protestant churches. Protestant theology is a Tower of Babel.

    Ricardo If you can “simply” change it there, where else, pray tell, did you change it as well? Your credibility is shot with that, well, simple statement alone.

    BFHU: Ricardo, what scriptures do you think we have changed?

    • One: I’m no protestant. I’m down with Y’shua (Luke 11:23). Y’shua tells us to make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit, Peter, Mary, Pope… errr, wait… Drop the last three. You openly defy that by trying to create disciples for the Catholic institution, aka, the church of satan. In terms of your historicity concerning the Roman church and the submission of the other churches to its authority, you’re either severely mistaken, unlearned, or deliberately trying to mislead people. So, which is it? I’ll give you an example – the Coptic Pope in Alexandria never submitted to the Catholic institution, and it’s historical fact the Alexandrian church pre-dates the Roman church (a quick look at a map will show you why… remember, this is a story that grew out of Israel, despite what White, Western Europeans would like you to believe). And for that, your Roman synagogue of satan, which was very powerful at the time (you’ve seem to have confused earthly power with the Lord’s blessing), moved to isolate that particular church, which was completely cut off from Christendom after the Arab Conquest in teh 8th century. You should look at your own “surprising things” your infallible Catholic pope has done and said while sitting on his magic chair/throne: i.e., the sun revolves around the earth, “children’s crusades,” allowing native South Americans to be burned, slaughtered, you name it in the name of a woman who’s no different in the eyes of God than you or I. So, before you accuse me of having a hero in Luther, you should know what you’re talking about instead of spewing Catholic rhetoric. BTW, the one example I provided of a church not submitting to the roman authority in and of itself completely does away with your assertion that all early churches fell under the roman power structure. I’ll give you a second one – the Eastern churches of Jerusalem and Constantinople/Byzantine church. At a time when Rome was swiftly collapsing, the Eastern Church flourished and the Hagia Sofia was for a time the most important center of Christendom and the Western and Eastern churches squabbled from the word “go”. That, friend, is historical fact. The world’s much bigger than western Europe. So, again, which is it: are you mistaken, unlearned, or lying? And, I’ve never seen “LOL” make a compelling theological/educated argument, so you might want to rethink that one. And where was Peter based out of? There is not a single shred of historical evidence indicating that Peter ever set foot in Rome. Paul, on the other hand, was the actual apostle to the gentiles, so yes, there’ s plenty of evidence of him being in Rome. I know Peter being crucified upside down makes for great Christian rhetoric, but there’s no evidence to suggest anything of the sort ever happened and there’s nothing to suggest he was anything other than the first great leader of the early church… in Jerusalem. Every group has a leader… but from that you get papal infallibility? So, yes, in that, you’re no different from JW’s, Mormons, Muslims, etc. Even Peter himself says the church is built on the foundation of apostles and prophets with Y’shua as the cornerstone (1 Peter 2:4-6); somewhere I must have missed where Peter wrote the church is built on himself (at this point, I’ll direct you to Mark 7:7-9). And yes, Peter was a great leader of the early church, but we both know (well… those who care to find out something beyond their worldview) that there are centuries of theological debate as the meaning of that statement, and, when it comes down to it, if we take an exegetical approach to studying the actual scriptures (remember those?) absolutely nowhere in scripture does Peter claim authority of other apostles (Paul puts him in place in Galatians 2:11, and you can also read Acts 15:1-23 and 1 Peter 5:1-5. But if you read 1 Peter, understand that those are Peter’s words, Jewish Peter. Not your Western-European Peter). Ephesians 2:19-20 shows the authority Messiah spoke of was shared with other apostles, and we see that the “loosing and binding” the Catholic institution attributes to Peter was shared by the local churches and not simply something given to Peter alone (Mat 18:18, Titus 2:15, etc). And in terms of corrupting scripture, I’ll point you to the Council of Trent in 1546, when the Catholic institution canonized the apocrypha, i.e., your precious Maccabees and Judith that not even the Jews saw as scripture, was not even written in Hebrew, never cited by Messiah (Luke 24:44), never themselves lay claim to inspiration, contradict themselves (Antiochus Epiphanes dies three different times in three different places), and places an un-Biblical preference on the subjugation of women (Ecclesiasticus 25:19 Any iniquity is insignificant compared to a wife’s iniquity; Ecclesiasticus 25:24 From a woman sin had its beginning. Because of her we all die; Ecclesiasticus 22:3 the birth of a daughter is a loss.). And oh yeah, Athanasius of Alexandria (a black man, btw… I know White people hate to hear stuff like that, but, as you said, you can’t change history because you don’t like it) came up with the first list of 66 books that made up the original canon that the Roman church agreed with. Oh yeah, and instead of referring to non-Catholics as “Bible Christians,” the term “Word of God Christians” would be more apt. You follow the commandments of men, I’ll follow the Word of God. Shalom.

  2. Dear Ricardo,
    I do not mean to be unkind. But you accuse the Catholic Church of being the Church of Satan. And yet,

    John 8:44
    ” the devil, … was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

    And Ricardo it is a lie that we baptize in the name of Peter and Mary. We baptize in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Who has told you this lie?

    Who has told you we create disciples for and institution? That is another lie. The Catholic Church creates disciples for Jesus. He founded the Catholic Church so of course we believe it is the True Church. Jesus has kept His promise that the Gates of Hell would never overcome it. And the Catholic Church is the only Church that has been in existence since the time of Jesus and His Apostles.

    I will pray for you Ricardo you seem to be full of anger and hate towards the Catholic Church and Catholics. I will pray for you to be filled with love and peace.

  3. Full of hate? No. Full of anger towards the Catholic institution for leading generations of people away from the saving grace of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob through the work of His Son, Y’shua, by saddling them with man-made millstones meant to draw people under your influence and away from that of the Holy Spirit? Very much so. You wrote: “It is a lie that we baptize in the name of Peter of May.” With you being a current Catholic and me being a former Catholic, we both know this isn’t true if we get down to the letter of the law. “Baptize” translates from the Greek “baptizō,” which itself comes from the word “baptō,” or, to immerse. If you’re saying the Catholic institution does not immerse its followers within fables concerning Mary (ascension, immaculate conception, Fatima, etc) and Peter (“pope,” leader of the Roman church, infallible, etc) that only serve to draw people’s attention and focus away from the New Covenant in Messiah’s blood, you’re not being truthful and, yes, getting in line behind the father of lies. When exactly in scripture did Y’shua found the Roman Catholic church? I must have missed the portion of the Gospels when He traveled to Rome. It is downright laughable to suggest Y’shua, at any point, founded the Roman Catholic institution. Point me, if you will, to the verse where He states, “I am founding the Roman Catholic Church.” You can’t. This is a perfect example of you adding to/altering the Word of God to suit your institutional aims. You don’t learn about Y’shua in the Roman Catholic institution; you learn about Roman Catholic dogma, i.e., “don’t read the Scriptures, listen to and follow our dogmas and traditions. Don’t come to the Lord, come to us. Confess to us. Pray through Mary’s intercession despite the fact the Scriptures tell us there is but one mediator between God and man – the Lord Jesus. Believe in man-made doctrine. Call a human ‘holy father.’ Perform sacraments to be saved. Work to be saved instead through the Grace of God that’s been clearly exemplified and weaved throughout the Torah, Tanakh, and Brit Hadasha (New Testament). Yes, cast aside canon and trust in the apocrypha.” What the heck does all that have to do with the Gospel? And, btw, can you even verbalize the Gospel without bastardizing it serve your own twisted means? You need to take the veil off and pray the Lord lets you see Him, not your institutionalized, dogmatic, man-made, downright satanic synagogue. You also wrote, “the Catholic Church is the only church…in existence since the time of Jesus.” Was Y’shua Roman Catholic? Did this take place within the borders of the Davidic Kingdom, or on the Italian peninsula? Here’s a Bible/history lesson for you – the “church” isn’t a building or an organization. In Bible speak, the word comes from “ekklesia,” meaning an “assembly” or “called out ones”, i.e., a collective body of believers … not a place or a building… believers! (Rom 16:5 – “greet the church that is in their house.”) Believers constitute the body of Y’shua (Eph 1:22,-23), not your lifeless, man-made institution. So, yes, in its original context, the catholic church (lower case as a generalized, non-Biblical term meaning “universal”) has been in existence from beginning (1 Cor 12:13… “all baptized by one Spirit into one body.”) But the Roman Catholic context you and this website serve was founded by a pagan named Constantine three hundred years after the time of Y’shua. Thus, no, your institution was not founded by Y’shua, but by a pagan in line with the will Lucifer. No, the gates of hell have not over come the universal church, i.e., the collective body of believers (this isn’t about denominations like you make it; it’s about creating disciples via the Grace of Jehovah through the work of His Son, Y’shua). Yes, the gates of hell are, however, firmly entrenched around the borders of Vatican City and around the hearts of all those who place the doctrine of men over the Word of God; a pagan is your cornerstone, not the Rock of Ages. Shalom.

  4. Do you actually think God is so unmerciful that He will send people to Hell who sought him in the best way they knew how to?

  5. You, as an fallible human being, do not get to define God’s mercy; He defines and provides that mercy. He’s defined that mercy as being through the blood of his Son, Messiah Y’shua, i.e., the Brit Hadesha/New Covenant (Jer. 31:31, Ez 16:63, Mark 14:24, Mat 26:28, 1 Cor 11:25, etc.) The Catholic institution takes the Gospel (John 3:16-18, with the key verses being 17 and 18) and corrupts God’s Way (John 14:6) of Salvation and His message of mercy by adding unnecessary, unscriptural, and unholy burdens (Mat 23:4) onto spiritual hungry men and women. This is the sad part – you look past God’s mercy that He and He alone defines and provides by not following His Word (Mat 7:22-23) and place your hope for salvation in an institution and your own works, not His atoning work on the cross for all who will believe. “To whom much is given… much will be required” (Luke 12:48). You have the Name, the Word, and the Way right there in front of you, and you choose to define them by your Western European terms and not by God’s revealed truth (Heb 1:1-2, John 17:4, John 19:30). He fulfilled His covenant with Abraham, that through his seed all the world would be blessed (Gen 12:3); Y’shua is that blessing. Y’shua is God’s mercy – not the Catholic institution. We come to Salvation (Y’shua) through His definition of grace and mercy (John 10:9), not through the best way you know how, i.e., your own definition of what that mercy should be. Now, in no way am I saying that all Catholics go to hell; there are many, many who’ve placed their hope for salvation through their faith (Greek: “pistis,” meaning “knowledge of, trust in, and obedience to”) Y’shua and will enter into God’s rest. However, we both know (and by your words on this site, you sound like one of them – Mat 12:37) there many who will not see life because they’ve chosen through their own free will to place their “pistis” in the Catholic institution’s teachings above those of the Messiah of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as clearly defined in Scripture (and the same goes for Baptists, Calvinists, Lutherans, Whomever who choose to do the same with their various institutionalized, extra-Biblical dogmas). Shalom.

  6. Ricardo,
    Your are in error about the Faith of the Catholic Church. You have listened to or been taught lies about our Church. In your earlier comment you accused the Catholic Church of changing the Word of God. You have made vague assertions of the Catholic Church INTERPRETING scripture differently than you do. That is not the same thing as changing the word of God.

    The crux of the problem is that you interpret scripture one way. Another Protestant denomination interprets it another way. And the Catholic Church interprets it still another way. So which interpretation is TRUTH?

    You are free to believe whatever you wish. But, I and billions of Catholic Christians believe and trust the teachings of the Church founded by Jesus Christ and His apostles. We do not trust an “institution” as you, so uncharitably,
    characterize it, we trust in Jesus and his teachings embodied in the Doctrine and Dogmas of the Catholic Church because He taught them.

  7. I’ve repeatedly listed names, verified historical occurrences, Scriptural references, exegetical theology, and translations from the original Greek – it’s there for all to see. There’s nothing denominational about that; there’s obviously nothing Catholic about that either, because instead of responding to it, you keep saying less and less and/or basically reciting the same un-Scriptural rhetoric over and over. Simply saying Catholicism was founded by Y’shua doesn’t make it so, especially when you don’t offer a shred of evidence (and you accuse me of being vague after my list of Scripture, verified history, who’s, what’s and when’s?). Not only is your hypocrisy and lack of support for your arguments evident to me, but I guarantee you that all of your readers who care to follow this post notice it as well. Simply saying “there’s no place like home, there’s no place like home, there’s no place like home” over and over again doesn’t pull you out of your man-made, theologically false fantasy land and into the reality of the saving Grace of Messiah Y’shua.

  8. Ricardo,

    What follows is a transcript of Patrick Madrid’s CD: Why I Am Catholic When I Could Be Anything Else

    Jesus founded a Church.

    Mt 16:17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.”I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.

    Let us do a thought experiment and suspend judgment about which Church is the church that Jesus founded.


    Mt 5:1“You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men.14″You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden;15nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house.16″Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.

    The Church that Jesus is establishing is VISIBLE so that the Father will be glorified. Now this passage is not necessarily about the Church but why would Jesus give us a advice that he Himself would not take? Why would he tell us to be visible and yet build a Church and leave us all questioning which Church it was? Does that make any sense?

    Now why would Jesus go to the trouble of establishing a Church and then make it so obscure and difficult to find that no one could know if they were in the True Church or not? Does that make any sense?

    Jesus said, “No one lights a lamp and then puts it under a basket”

    So why would he allow His Church be so difficult to find among thousands of competing beliefs that it is equivalent to lighting a lamp and putting it under a basket?


    Mt 16:17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.”I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.

    We see here that Jesus declared His plan to build His Church. Whichever Church this is, that He is establishing, it is His Church. He started this Church. No other human being would be able to claim to have started this church.This also is a church that is being built by Christ. Although the members of this church are human the builder and perfecter of this church is Christ Himself.


    Mt 28:18 “And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

    First Jesus declares, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore..”

    Go ….Why?Whenever you see the word “therefore” you have to find out what it is there for? And the rule of thumb is that the answer can be found in something previous to it. And there we find Jesus saying

    “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.”

    So because of the authority given to Jesus He is sending the apostles out into the world with a certain authority. Some may argue that that is stretching it. Jesus isn’t exactly saying that there. I believe He is but we can bolster that with passages such as Luke 10:16:

    And Jesus said, “”The one who listens to you listens to Me, and the one who rejects you rejects Me; and he who rejects Me rejects the One who sent Me.”

    To Peter

    Mt 16:19“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.”

    And also to the Apostles:

    Mt18:18“Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.

    So there are a number of places where it is clear that the disciples were being sent forth with the authority of Christ. And they are being sent forth to the whole world. Not to just one country or town. Not to just this race or that, or a certain era in time, but to everyone, in the whole world, for all time, until the end of time. Jesus’ Church is a universal Church. This is not a church that convinces people to say the sinner’s prayer and then moves on. This church makes disciples…..of all nations. This is just another way of saying, “Make Converts”. When you convert someone you bring them in to the Church. And the doorway into the Church is the doorway of baptism, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

    Mt 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

    Next we see that this is a teaching Church.

    “…teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you.”

    So, Jesus gave commandments for the apostles to teach. They were not just suggestions. These are teachings Jesus commanded the disciples to pass on. So, when this church, whichever this church may be, goes forth and teaches; what she is doing is not saying, “This is what we think should be taught.” But rather, this is what Jesus Himself taught us. And we are simply passing that on to you.

    And then Jesus says, Behold I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Think about what that means. What must it mean?

    Jesus Christ was neither a liar nor a fool. So since He was not deceiving us when He said those words, nor was He mistaken, we can rely on what He said about being with this Church that He was going to establish. That must mean that never could there have been a time nor will there ever be a time when this Church stopped or fell away or was ever vanquished by anything, because Jesus was going to be with it to protect it.

    So, now lets get into the heart of the thought experiment. Let’s consider where we are today. The Catholic Church is one Church among many other churches that claim to be the true church. It is visible. People can see Catholic Churches in their town. There are Catholic schools and universities, there is St. Peter’s in Rome, etc.these all make the Catholic Church visible.

    But we are not just talking about buildings. The priest, bishops, and pope are all visible. The lay people may not be prominently visible but if you are friends with a Catholic their catholicity becomes visible, sooner or later, either by seeing a crucifix around their neck, a rosary on their car mirror, pictures or statues in their home, praying with the sign of the cross, etc.

    And the Catholic Church is visible in a particular way in its teachings. If you go into a town and ask for the Church where they confess their sins to a priest, and they pray for the dead, baptize babies, believe in the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, teach that the mass is a sacrifice, begin and end prayers with the sign of the cross. What church are they going to send you to? No one is going to send you to the Baptist Church, the Lutheran Church or any church other than the Catholic Church.

    It is also visible because it has distinctive Catholic teachings. You might even say peculiar Catholic teachings that are unique to the Catholic Church. But there are other churches out there and some do and believe in one or two of the distinctive Catholic teachings.

    So, let’s continue with our thought experiment. Let’s roll the clock back 50 years. The Catholic church is there but there are no Calvary Chapels. Chuck Smith was alive and probably still Catholic. But he hadn’t yet founded the first Calvary Chapel. It was founded in 1965.

    Let’s go back 200 years to the year 1810. The Catholic Church is there. The pope, the bishops, the teachings, you’ll see all those outward signs of the presence of the Catholic Church we mentioned above. But there is something you will not find, no matter how hard you look, in the year 1810. You will not find the Mormon Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. It did not exist. It had not been founded yet by the man who would establish it, Joseph Smith. There also were no Jehovah’s Witnesses in the year 1810. Charles Taze Russell, the man who would start that religion had not been born yet. There were no Seventh Day Adventists, because Ellen Gould White had not started that religion yet. There were no Christian Scientists because Mary Baker Eddy would not found that church for another nearly 70 years, in 1879.

    But now let’s go further. Let’s go to the year 1510. Again, the Catholic Church was visible alright, a lot like today. It was a very messy time. There were priest scandals, the lay people were not well catechized in the faith, tumult and tension in the Catholic Church. But you can see it in 1510, the pope, the bishops, saints and sinners and everyone in between. But there is something you can’t see in the year 1510. Protestantism. It just did not exist. Luther would not pound his 95 Theses on the door of the church for another seven years. Calvin, Zwingli and many others had not yet begun to break away from the Catholic Church or the Lutheran Church. Think about that. In the year 1509 Protestantism did not exist anywhere in the whole wide world of Christiandom. No Presbyterians. No Baptists. No Methodists. No Lutherans, etc.

    And if you keep going back in time you will find that the Catholic Church has always been in existence since the time of Jesus’ resurrection. The Pope, the bishops, the teachings, etc. You find popes making decisions and bishops from across the world sending to Rome or traveling there themselves to get a decision from the Bishop of Rome. Who does not want to belong and trust the Church that Jesus Christ founded. Why would anyone prefer a Church started by a man?

  9. You’re over-the-top condescension is amazing, especially considering how unlearned you show yourself to be in both theology and history. It’s quite obvious to myself and to your readers that you have no answer for the statements I’ve made. You’re throwing random man-made doctrines up against the wall and hoping something sticks at this point, but sadly for you, none of it is. For example, I asked you what the Gospel is, and you haven’t responded. I clearly demonstrated your alterations of the canonized Scriptures through your insertion of the Apocrypha, and you haven’t replied. I’m talking about Y’shua; you’re more concerned with creating Catholics (i.e., your “thought experiment). Do you even know who Y’shua is? Seriously; do you know more about Catholicism, or Y’shua?
    The Bible was not originally written in English, nor can the content vocabulary within its pages be defined on Western European terms. As I stated previously (which, like the overwhelming majority of what I’ve written you’ve chosen to ignore… because, quite frankly, you have no answer for it), what we translate as “church” in English (an extremely non-descript language when compared to others) is the Greek word “ekklesia” (and, since you may not know or may have not taken the time to find out, the original language of the Brit Hadesha/New Testament is Greek) meaning “assembly” or “called out ones”, i.e., a collective body of believers … not a place, building, or institution… but rather, believers! (Rom 16:5) Believers constitute the body of Y’shua (Eph 1:22,-23). Yes, Y’shua has built His body here on Earth (body of believers, of which Messiah is the head – Eph 4:15-16), and the gates of Hades has not overpowered it. Now, that’s what the Bible says. That’s what Paul wrote, and he sure as day wasn’t Catholic. Paul was a Jew (Acts 26:5). There’s absolutely nothing Catholic or institutional about that; no reference to the Vatican or the papacy anywhere in that.
    As per your “first clue,” that verse from Mathew is actually 5:13, not 5:1. Yes, human beings are very visible, and we’ve already established – twice in my posts – that “church” is translated from the Greek “ekklesia,” which refers to people, not an institution. So, yes, people (or, specifically in this context, people who believe) are very visible. Yes, human beings are visible, not invisible. Messiah is glorified through His believers. No one has to question which ekklesia (church) He’s talking about, because Y’shua says you are either with Him, or you are against Him (Luke 11:23). Again, He’s talking about people – not your Roman synagogue of satan. So, by your definition and according to your understanding of a church being an institution with four walls and spiritual leader living in grandeur (Y’shua was a humble servant, btw), no it doesn’t make sense. But through the Bible’s definition of what a church is (ekklesia), it makes perfect sense. That same Bible says he (or, in your case, she) who trusts in (herself) is a fool (Prov 28:26) and to not lean on your own understanding (Prov 3:5). Therefore (you must ask yourself, what’s it there for?), I’ll trust in what the Bible says the church is (people, believers) and not in a fool’s definition. “Seek and you shall find,” oh Pam of little faith. So difficult to find? Again, I’ll take His word for it. “Behold, I stand at the door and knock,” (Rev 3:20) “He is not far from each one of us,” (Acts 17:27). Again, I’ll take Scripture’s interpretation of Scripture over that of a fool’s self understanding.
    On to your second “clue.” One word: Ekklesia. That’s enough about your second “clue”! Yes, Y’shua founded His ekklesia. Do I need to define it for you again? “For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned” (Mat 12:37). You’ve put your trust in Constantine’s institution. Constantine was very human. While you’ve put your faith in an institution built by a pagan (in fact, he hadn’t even been baptized when he presided over the Council of Nicaea), I’ve put my faith in Y’shua and strive to let my light shine before men so they might worship my Father in heaven, not something started by an unbeliever in the early 4th century.
    With regards to #3, I’m going to start by demonstrating for you and any possible readers out there the depth of your lack of knowledge regarding the Word of God. You quote Mathew 28:19 and write to make disciples “is just another way of saying, ‘Make Converts.’” You couldn’t be more wrong, thus, the Catholic institution is not the “teaching” institution you claim it to be; how can you teach what you do not know? The word “disciples” in the Greek is “mathēteuō,” which means, “to instruct.” Ergo, instruct in the name of Y’shua. Instruct in the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Not to make “converts” to Catholicism. Not “convert” people in the name of the papal supremacy. So, no (and I invite you, and all who read this to look that word up), it’s not “just another way of saying,” anything. You call yourself a teaching institution? What exactly are you teaching? By your own words, you’re definitely not teaching the Scriptures. Thus, “Go therefore and instruct all the nations, baptizing (“baptizō” – immersing) them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit,” not the Catholic institution. Nowhere in that verse (or in the entire Bible for that matter) do you find the Catholic institution with its pagan founder (Constantine) even mentioned. Yes, Y’shua is with his church even to the end of the age. The Bible calls the Holy Spirit/Comforter the “paraklesis” in Greek, which translates literally as “the Coming Alongside.” And with the Bible clearly stating that the church is the collective body of believers (as previously demonstrated) and not your man-made institution, the rest of your argument (which is built on your non-Biblical presupposition that the church is in fact an institution) falls apart completely. “Ekklesia”… enough said.
    Hey, why stop rolling back the clock at the resurrection? Let’s go back to the life of Christ! He was a Jew. His apostles? Jews. Paul? A Jew. Mary? A Jew. Catholics? Nope. No such thing. And hey, lets go back 500 years before that! Jews. Let’s go back 1000 years before that! Jews. Let’s go back 2000 years before that! Jews. Let’s go back… well, you get the idea. We can take this back to the beginning because God’s message of salvation has been proclaimed since the beginning of time. Redemption is not a Catholic notion. You want to see God’s idea of redemption? Read about the Exodus. Israel did nothing to deserve to be saved; He saved them according to a promise. It’s initiated and completed by the God of Israel through His covenant with Abraham and His promise to His Chosen People (Jews) to bring about salvation for all mankind through the special relationship that He initiated. Y’shua is that blessing. Y’shua is Salvation. Not your Catholic institution, who’s oldest vice is anti-Semitism. Go ask your Jewish neighbor, they’ll tell you all about the way Catholics have historically treated them and driven them completely away from even considering the Messiahship of Y’shua as a possibility. I know for many people (especially Catholics) the New Testament doesn’t start until Mathew 1:18 (Y’shua’s birth), but the first 17 verses break down Messiah’s lineage to bind Him to the history of Jewish nation. He was a person born within a particular culture with a unique history. You’ll only understand Y’shua if you see Him within the light of the story He completes (Hebrews 1:2… he’s spoken. I must have missed the part where it says the Catholics will continue speaking for Him. “It is finished!”) So, why stop your timeline at the resurrection? Y’shua is the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End (Rev 22:13). His plan for salvation didn’t begin in the early 1st century!
    So yeah, let’s keep going back in time because this way, I can show your readers how, again, you’re unlearned, mistaken, or lying. You write: “You find popes making decisions and bishops from across the world sending to Rome or traveling there themselves to get a decision from the Bishop of Rome.” Wrong again. All Roman bishops had to be confirmed by the authorities in Constantinople – the Eastern Orthodox Church! – until Gregory III… in 731 A.D. If you do the math, you’ll find that’s 700 years after Y’shua. For all who may read this, look it up. Research. Heck, open up a 7th grade World Civilizations text book and refresh your memory. While the Western Roman Empire crumbled, the Eastern Empire flourished for another 1000 years. The Hagia Sofia in Constantinople was the center of Christendom, not Rome. Through sheer population numbers alone, there were vastly more Orthodox-believing Christians in the East than there were in the West; that’s not even debated by scholars. It wasn’t until A.D. 800 with the crowning of Charlemagne that the Roman church could look eye-to-eye with the waning power of the Eastern Church. It wasn’t even until the conversion of Attila the Hun in the mid 5th century that Rome even began to demonstrate some form of influence over the western world. And in the first 200-300 years of the church, the theological leaders of the church came from North Africa, not Rome! Here, I’ll help you out, look up these names: Tertullian, Cyprian, Augustine. In fact, the earliest documents, which date from the late 2nd century A.D., do not even agree as to whom the men were that actually served as bishop of Rome.
    Finally, regarding your veneration of Peter in Mathew 16:17-20, If we read the Gospels, Peter was a fickle hot-head who, yes, would go on to become a rock of the early church. God transformed his nature into something solid and reliable. Y’shua uses two different words for rock in that passage – “Petros,” which is a masculine noun, and “petras,” which is a feminine noun. Based on the Greek and not your Western European worldview, Y’shua is speaking of two different things and thus, the “ekklesia” is not built on Peter the man. In fact, Peter himself calls the “ekklesia,” i.e., all believers, living stones (rocks) with Y’shua as the Cornerstone! (1 Peter 2:4-6). Thus, it’s Peter’s confession of faith Mat 16:16 (which you conveniently leave out) which represents the feminine noun “petras” that Y’shua speaks of. If you would study the Word of God instead of memorizing Catholic rhetoric, you’d find that the “ekklesia” is always referred to in feminine terms, i.e., the “bride” of Christ (Rev 18:23). Thus, its Peter’s confession of faith that made him part of the “ekklesia” founded by Y’shua; this has nothing to do with the Catholic institution. Yes, “On this statement of faith I will build my ekklesia.” Yes, it’s the testimony of the ekklesia that gives glory to God like a shining city on a hill! Believers are Y’shua’s visible church through the testimony of our confession of faith, because we were saved by faith and faith alone in Y’shua, not by the mandates of your satanic synagogue. If we use your extremely literal method of Biblical interpretation, in Mat 16:23, Y’shua also calls Peter, “satan,” so what does that mean? You must view that passage in light of the whole of scripture, not as something solely meant to prove your man-made dogma. Hear the message to the Roman church with regards to Salvation/Y’shua in the 1st century, and put your faith in Messiah Y’shua – Rom 3:28, 3:22, Rom 5:9, Rom 11:6).

  10. Dear Ricardo,
    If you are really interested in responses to your questions/assertions, I invite you to explore my posts on the topics you have questions about. I have already responded to previous inquirers. The reason I am not going to give you a personal response if b/c it is a lot of work. One sentence of yours takes paragraphs, essays, and sometimes even whole books to respond in a thorough and clear way.

    I have written in response to all of your “questions”. There are 492 posts on my site here. When you go to the home page, on the right hand column are the categories of the posts I have written. If you are truly interested I invite you to explore my posts on the topic you have questions about. But I am not going to respond to your long comments. I don’t have the time since I have already spent hours and hours composing the posts on my website.

  11. Perhaps. Or perhaps you’re a total phony who doesn’t really know what she’s talking about, and with me being the first person who’s really pushed you on this site, you’ve “tucked tail and run,” so to speak, instead of being ready in and out of season (2 Tim 4:2). Maybe this is why you cut and paste from someone else’s transcript and regurgitate unscriptural doctrine and tradition, rather than take to the time to represent your “teaching church,” as you put it. Let’s see… I can study the Word of God, or spend time on each of your posts… hmmm… what to do? What to do? The same thing that’s happening to you here on this post will continue happening on your other posts – you’re readers will see you for the sham that you are. Shalom.

    … forgive my typos.

    Again, it’s amazing how all of your other posters get “personal responses,” but my posts that completely expose you for who and what you are… the crickets offer louder exegetical analysis of the Scriptures than you do, because you can’t, because you do not know Y’shua. (Mat 7:22-23)

  12. Ricardo,
    I didn’t think you were really interested. I do give personal replies to those who ask questions and make comments. But there are some who after a while I realize they are not actually interested in a conversation or an answer to their questions. Their goal in commenting on this site is to try to undermine my faith and other readers’ faith in Our Lord and His Church. I then stop responding to them. You are not the first and I doubt that you will be the last.

    I have given you 4 personal responses, one of which was extensive. I have given, in addition two or three other responses, one was extensive and a quote from another Catholic who has several websites, and speaks all over the world. But each of my responses only result in more vitriol and name calling from you. I prefer peace. Which you have wished me so I will no longer be responding to you. Shalom.

  13. In terms of not really being interested, why else would I be here? It’s my prayer that all would come to faith in Y’shua. So, when I see people leading others away from salvation in and through Y’shua and towards teachings and traditions that give glory in an institution rather than the Creator they’re supposedly pointing towards, yeah, that draws my interest. Shalom.

  14. Hello Ricardo, What’s your point really? I will start calling you Richard if you insist to use Y’shua. I read your other comments here. You have a real problem of a very distorted sense of history and reality. You’re obviously a very unhappy person at where you worship or fellowship; otherwise you won’t be here ranting the way you do. if you must, shalom, and peace be with you.

  15. We started off on a issue regarding the 10 Commandments, Pam chopped up what I initially wrote, and I commenced to answer each one of her “points.” For instance, on her previous post she gave three “clues,” and I answered each one with a paragraph. My clear, concise sentences and writing prose can hardly be considered “ranting.” She responded with rhetoric while I gave names, dates, places, and Scriptural exegesis. If anyone has questions, I’ve provided them a framework of the “5 W’s” and they can look into it themselves (1 John 4:1) so they’re not bound by her (and your) unlearned rhetoric. For example, my use of “Y’shua.” I use because that’s His name. No one was calling Him “Gee-suhs” when He walked the Earth in the 1st century. He was Jewish (and I understand that Catholics aren’t very fond of Jews, but that’s for you to deal with, not me), and His name is Y’shua in Hebrew and Aramaic, which means “Salvation” (there is no “Gee” sound in Hebrew). Thus, I do Him the respect of addressing Him by His name, and I’d appreciate it if you’d do the same when addressing me – I come from Spanish-speaking people and, thus, my name is Ricardo, not “Richard.” I’m not defined by the same kind box you try to fit Y’shua within and define Him by. I’ve studied in Hebrew and I’ve studied in Greek (the language of the Scriptures) and I define it on those terms – a concept that Pam agrees with. In terms of my “distorted history,” provide for me one refutation of any one name or event I listed (Pam couldn’t, and thus, she didn’t). Here, I’ll help you out: Tertullian, Cyprian, Augustine, Gregory III. Also, I’d like to point out that you didn’t even know Y’shua’s name, so who’s history is distorted? Finally, “Shalom” cannot simply be defined by the word “peace.” In Hebrew it means personal wholeness, contentedness, satisfaction, and peace. I wish you shalom, but shalom in Y’shua, not in your Catholic institution, which can not provide it, only Jehovah Shalom can. This is a story about how God fulfilled His covenants with Abraham, Moses and David to bring salvation to all the nations through His dealings with one nation – the Jews, not the Romans.

  16. Hello Ricardo, Jesus is just a transliteration into English. If you think that Y’shua is found in OT, is edifying to use the name for your private devotion or using as a tool to convert Jews, all praises to you. Jehovah Shalom if you must but to be sure, “Jehovah” is a transliteration and a quite a bad attempt by KJVers. A little knowledge can be very dangerous. Maybe you can read a good history book on Christianity to gain a better perspective on things.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: