30 October, 2009

Discussion with St. Alan servant of Jesus about the authority of the Church and the Scriptures

(St. Alan) That is a false teaching that only the catholic church can interpret Scriptures. The inspired Scriptures were written by God through Godly people by the Holy Spirit. The catholic church did not write them.

(Cristoiglesia) I guess you will have to provide at least one of the New Testament authors who was not a Catholic Christian to prove your theory. The fact is they were all Catholic Christians because there were no other Christians in the first century when they were written. Every word of the New Testament was written by Catholic Christians and the Church chose the inspired writings as Canon at the African Synods of Hippo and Carthage in the late fourth and early fifth centuries. Most reasonable people would accept the fact that the source of writing would be the best source to interpret the writing.

By the end of the first century the Church was formed around the bishop who represented the Church in apostolic succession. The great commission was well underway and had extended to the Gentiles as well as the Jews. In scriptures we see St. Paul in his epistles telling the Church to respect the Sacred Traditions handed to them coming from both written sources and oral ones. Even the written sources were delivered orally as transcripts were very rare and few people were literate. There was not widespread distribution of what we consider today to be inspired Scripture as decided at the African Synods by the Church in the late fourth and early fifth centuries. Throughout the first sixteen centuries of the Church there was never any question that the authority of truth rested in the Church as the “regula fidei” where all teaching was and is measured by Sacred Tradition not by the Bible alone, especially when interpreted outside of its source the Church. To orthodox Christians this would be considered ridiculous as well as arrogant considering the church never wrote the Bible to be a sole source of faith, morals and practice and one author even reminded those who would approach its use in such a way as to consider it the only source that it is incomplete as far as teaching and that Christ taught much more than what it contained. In fact, it warns that it contains only a small part of Christ’s teaching, but the faithful need not fear because the Church was sent the Holy Spirit that leads the Church to all truths.

Obviously, because there are those who have rejected orthodox Christianity some lack the fullness of truth that is contained in the Episcopal structure of Christ’s Church. They lack the fullness of worship by not having the corporeal Christ present in their worship. They lack the fullness of faith by not receiving His Body and Blood that the Bible and Sacred Tradition say is necessary for eternal life. The Church is led by men as the enduring Church and not by a book easily misinterpreted and its teaching turned into the traditions and doctrines of men by those through eisegesis use it to support their desires of the flesh very often exhibited by their hatred for the Church and hatred for the most sacred of gifts to humanity His Body and Blood of the Eucharist. These misinterpretations also cause them to have animosity for each other with the same source, the Bible being used to justify schisms which are usually not so much the result of theological disagreements so much as pridefulness and deceit which are no gifts of the Spirit but attributes of the flesh that inhibit our process of sanctification that leads to final salvation. Perhaps this is why Jesus said as a prophetic statement, that unless we eat of His Body and drink His blood we have no life in us. Perhaps this is why the Bible teaches that it is not enough to cry “Lord, Lord” as some of those who do will hear at their judgment that Christ never knew them and be thrown into the lake of fire.

Christ did not teach that we are to gather around a book of Scriptures to find the truth but that the truth is found in the Church that gathers around the bishop. God was not the author of division as has occurred with those who have abandoned the Church for their private interpretations of Scripture into tens of thousands of exponentially increasing schisms without end. God is a God of unity where He prayed His prayer before His arrest and crucifixion that we all be one. He is not a God that can only be found in the pages of a Book but who is found in His Church and where His corporeal presence is given to His Church as He promised so that we may endure to eternal life and His Church may endure until He comes again. It is His Church where the truth resides and it is the place where we find the ”bulwark and ground of the truth”, there is no other.

St. Alan) 2 Timothy 3:16,17 16All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

The interpretation of the inspired Scriptures is by Godly men with the Holy Spirit. Not by only one church. The Bible is not to be interpreted according to our own desires and prejudices which the catholic church has done for over a thousand years.

(Cristoiglesia) I have explained this to you before. Yes, the Catholic Church wrote those words and we truly believe them. But you will notice that those words are not an endorsement for Scripture alone. And, you must remember that Jesus gave all teaching authority to His Church and the writing and canonization of Scripture is done under the authority given by Christ to teach. The Scriptures were written by the Church to be used and understood in the community of the Church and not for private interpretation outside of the teaching authority given by Christ. Nowhere will you see in Scriptures that what is contained is the entirety or fullness of Christ’s teaching. In fact the Scriptures tell us that if all that Jesus taught was written down that all the books in the world could not contain His teaching. But, through the authority He left, His Church, the fullness of His teaching is promised

(St. Alan) The very fact that you claim the catholic church wrote the bible, the catholic church canonized them, and only the catholic church can interpret them says the catholic church is very close to becoming a cult!

I give the catholic church about another 50 years before it completely becomes a cult like the JW and Mormons.

(Cristoiglesia) I would remind you that the Jehovah Witnesses and the Mormons all came out of the Protestant movement and in particular the Millerite-Campbellite movement along with the Church of Christ, Disciples of Christ, Peoples Temple, Branch Davidians, Seventh Day Adventist and etc. One could certainly support the theory that the heretical doctrine of Sola Scriptura had a lot to do with the divisions and the heretical thought that each person is their own theologian and authority.

Jesus gave the authority to the Church which is represented by apostolic succession. In doing so He gave certain promises to humanity and to those of us who follow His teaching. He promised that His Church would endure for all times. He said that the gates of hell would never prevail against the Church, and He provided leadership that is preserved for all times with the fullness of truth. The Bible further states that the Church is “the pillar and foundation of the truth”. Jesus promised to be with His Church in both a spiritual way through the Holy Spirit and in a corporeal way through the Eucharist. These promises give confidence and guidance that the 2000 year old enduring Church is the only Church that fulfills His promises. So, either you acknowledge this fact or search to find another church that fits His promises. There is none. But some men out of their pride abandon and protest Christ’s Church by creating their own counterfeit to what Christ has created. They entice and seduce those that Christ prophesied would someday no longer be able to endure the sound doctrine in the Church and find their own teachers that satisfy their itching ears. Those are the Protestants like yourself. So, in conclusion, it is the Protestants that are responsible for the more than 30,000 schisms that have been produced by the heretical teaching of sola Scriptura and Sola Fide and all of the so called cults And not the Catholic Church who stands alone as the Ark for humanity and the shining city on the hill (Mat. 5:14).

God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

24 October, 2009

Continuing discussion with "Bourn Again" about the veracity of Scriptures

(Cristoiglesia) By what authority does any Protestant have to question the authority given by Jesus to His Church?

(Bourn Again) If you disagree with the Bible then it is our job to step in. Jesus never gave authority to the Roman Catholic Church. The Apostles had authority in the sense that they:
1. Had the Holy Spirit, but so do all true Christians
2. They were preaching the Gospel, giving them the power to weigh who was following it.

(Cristoiglesia) Really, so the professed heretics have a “job” to decide the meaning of Scripture and to step in when they disagree with the God given authority of the Church in interpreting Scripture. Jesus gave all authority to the Church here:

Matthew 16:18 (King James Version)
18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

The Bible explicitly says it is not for private interpretation outside the Church that produced it here:

2 Peter 1:20-21 (King James Version)
20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

(Bourn Again) To say the Church is infalliable in a whole is the same as saying the President or Dictators are infalliable. Are they not also given power by God? Right, right, "the church will never fall to the gates of hell". When Jesus said this He wasn't refering to the what we see physically as a Church, but to all who follow him. The catholic church, not the Catholic church. It also does not make it infalliable, but it does mean that the flame of Christian salvation will never extinguish. You seem to think that it can't be diminished. Satan can not blow out this candel, but he can make it smaller (by which I mean, make mistakes). The body of Christ can not be killed, but it can be wounded!

(Cristoiglesia) To compare the authority from Christ to His Church to secular authority is ridiculous. Did Jesus give the following authority to secular authorities like He did His Church?

Matthew 16:19-22 (King James Version)
19And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Jesus only founded one Church and that Church biblically, historically and patristically is proven to be the Catholic Church which is undeniably the enduring Church Jesus spoke of in Scriptures. There is no other as you labor to suggest. If the Church has the authority to bind or to loose on earth and heaven as Jesus said, then it would logically follow that the Church is infallible when acting within that authority. The Church can be wounded by heresy as in the Protestant rebellion against the Church but the Church remains everything Jesus promised it would be. It should not be judged by those who willingly separate from the Church because they can no longer endure sound doctrine but by those who are the faithful and the obedient who reject the worldly and the doctrines of men. Satan has no power or authority over Christ’s Church. Certainly the 30,000+ schisms among the Protestants reveal the fact that there is no unity and that the source of this disunity is the author of confusion and the author of lies Satan himself who teaches another authority on earth for Christians besides Christ’s Church. He uses God’s written Word to divide the Church by calling it the authority instead of the Church. He deceives humanity by appealing to their pride that they can found a church superior and with greater veracity than what Jesus founded. They are further deceived in believing that they individually can come to separate and differing interpretations of Scripture according to their desires and that these interpretations are true when they conflict with the teaching authority of Christ’s only Church the Catholic Church. This is a great deception and false teaching that seduces those desiring God but following another spirit into destruction.

Matthew 7:21-23 (King James Version)
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

(Bourn Again) In Luke 24:44 Jesus clearly states that the OT was broken into the Law, the prophets, and the psalms. Where do the deutercanonicals fall under this? They are either either weren't in the Septuigint, or they were ignored.

(Cristoiglesia) Jesus is speaking of the prophetic statements about His coming. He was speaking of the Old Testament which was the Septuagint from which He quoted and from which contains the Deuterocanonicals. He did not exclude any of the books of the Old Testament by this statement as you presume.

(Bourn Again) Josephus (a non-Christian, I know, but still a great historian that confirms that speaks of Jesus) said in Contra Apion 1:7-8 that there were 22 books in the Jewish Testament (currently there are 24, but He most likely considered either Ruth a part of Judges and Lamentations a part of Jeremiah or Esther and Ecclesiastes were not included in the canon), which according to the Jewish numbering (combining books and such) is the same as the 39 in the Protestant Bible. This excludes the Deutercanonicals as part of the Septuigiant.

(Cristoiglesia) There was no Jewish Canon until the Council of Jamnia (90 AD) when the Pharisaical Canon was adopted by the Jews. This Canon was not the same Canon chosen by the Christians at the African Synods which was the Canon of the Septuagint used continuously by the Catholic Church from Pentecost. Josephus was either referring to the canon in use by the Pharisees which is most likely or the Canon of the Sadducees. Obviously He was not referring to the canon of the Essenes/ Diaspora or the Ethiopian Jews. You seem to think that the Jews in Jesus’ time had only one canon of Scriptures and that is a false assumption. It was not unified until Jamnia in 90 AD with the adoption of the canon of the Pharisees. This is the same canon adopted by the Protestants 1500+ years afterwards. To the Christian Church it does not matter which Canon the Jews adopted as it was not binding on Christ’s Church.

(Cristoiglesia) Of course the Canon was not decided until the completion of the three African Synods of Hippo and Carthage.

(Bourn Again) My main point here is that he was denying their authority. Not only this, but he sets them aside from the Septuagint.

(Cristoiglesia) I still do not see your point since there was no binding authority.

(Cristoiglesia) This is nonsense. The Septuagint always contained the Deuterocanonicals since before the Church was founded. The Canon of the Septuagint was the Canon of the Diaspora and the Essene Jews in its entirety including the deuterocanonical books. The Christian Bible was canonized in the late fourth century and it contained the same books we have today including the Deuterocanonicals."

(Bourn Again) Prove it. I have seen numerous sources that would argue against you.

(Cristoiglesia) I am sure that you can but I am also sure that their scholarship would be flawed by prejudice. There is no scholarly source that would deny the presence of the Deuterocanonicals in the Septuagint whether Protestant or Catholic. The Deuterocanonical books were found among the scrolls of Qumran supporting the fact that they were among the Canon of the Essenes.

(Bourn Again) Besides, if it was already there when the Bible was canonized, why didn't they do it the first time? It was there, but they ignored it. If it's God's Word, when they should have accepted it with open arms, seeing as how they had the chance. You said you became a Catholic because they didn't change? This is an obvious change. They rejected the Apocrypha (I decided I will no longer call it the Deutercanonicals because they are not canoncial). I challenge you to find a Septuagint translation or source that claims that the septuagint included the apocrypha before the fourth century.

(Cristoiglesia) It was done the first time at the African Synods. It was always accepted as Canon. No part of the Septuagint was excluded as Canon. There was NEVER a rejection of any books of the Septuagint by the Church. The Septuagint contained the Deuterocanonicals at least in the year 150 BC but there is no reason to believe that they did not exist 150 years before this in the Septuagint. There is no record of them not being a part of the Septuagint.

(Cristoiglesia) You need to show me the doctrines by which you think the Deuterocanonical books disagree and why.

(Bourn Again) This was a little confusing. I thought I gave you that. And I don't think the Apocrypha disagrees with it, but I think that the doctrins were based on the Apocrypha and thereby disagree with scripture.

(Cristoiglesia) No, you made empty allegations without supporting your eisegesis.

(Cristoiglesia) The Bible being a teaching tool is not an insult but testimony to its veracity.

(Bourn Again) Don't blaspheme and lower the value of the Word of God. The word of God is not a tool, but is alive and active. If it was just a teaching tool, why was it canonized? The Bible is the infalliable inspired word of God, not just a simple teaching tool on the same level or a textbook.

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, it is a part of Sacred Tradition.

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, the Septuagint was the accepted Canon by the first Christians and certainly by the New Testament authors and Jesus.

(Bourn Again)Yes, but that did not have the Apocrypha in it, as we see in Luke 24:44.

(Cristoiglesia) Luke 24:44 does not say anything about the Deuterocanonicals.

(Bourn Again)"Jesus' golden rule "do unto others" is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others. " Wow. I said it to. I must be a prophet. There's a difference in teaching the same thing and making a prophesy. Most of your so called prophesies are similar teachings. I'm not saying it's 100% off, but it isn't 100% on meaning it is not God's word.

(Cristoiglesia) Well if close similarity between Scriptures excludes them as canonical then there is a lot more to exclude besides the Deuterocanonicals.

Indeed, the author of Tobit goes out of his way to make clear that his hero is fictional.

(Bourn Again) Where? And if it's a fictional story, should it be considered inspired, esspecially if it contains inaccurate history? God would not give one an inaccurate history for a story, even if it was fictional. Jesus' stories never make wrong claims of real historical figures.

(Cristoiglesia) So any historical inaccuracy found we must exclude it from the canon? No, that is not a test of inspiration.

(Bourn Again) That's all for now. I hope you can't find a argument against this (i.e. I'm right), but none the less, good luck finding one. God bless!

(Cristoiglesia) Actually, I find it quite humorous when a Protestant argues against the Bible which they believe is their only regula fidei. Thanks for the opportunity to set you straight. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

23 October, 2009

"Bourn Again" questioning the inspiration of the Christian Bible

(Bourn Again) We both know the Bible claims to be inspired, but the "deutercanonicals" never claim that. No deutercanonicals were written by an apostle or prophet, none of them were confirmed by miracles (something that happens often in the Bible (for example, 1 Kings 18 and Hebrews 2:4). Also, they never contain predictive prophesy, which would have confirmed inspiration. 2 Maccabees actually admits that it was an abridgment of another man's work and expresses concern on if a good job was done (2 Macc. 2:23, 15:38). How could this happen if it was inspired?

(Cristoiglesia) There are some instances of the books of the Bible claiming inspiration but almost always in particular instances such as prophetic statements. I cannot think of but one instance where it is clear that a particular book is inspired. In the case of the Old Testament only the second book of Samuel contains a statement of inspiration and only then in regards to a particular personal revelation. So, if one is to believe inspiration only of the testimony of the biblical authors then almost all the books of the Bible would be excluded as canonical. The Deuterocanonicals are not written by an apostle because there were none when the books were written. All the Old Testament books would be excluded if this was a criterion for inspiration and most of the Old Testament books were not written by prophets. The same is true if confirmation by miracles is a criterion. The author referred to another’s writing for more complete information. This is completely appropriate for an author to supply supporting sources.

(Bourn Again) The New Testament writers also never quoted anything from the deutercanonicals. The gospel of Matthew quotes or alludes to the Old Testament about 130 times, but never once did they quote the deutercanonicals. Some church fathers did approve of the deutercanonicals, but many denied their inspiration, such as Origin, Jerome, Athanasius, and Cyril of Jerusalem.

(Cristoiglesia) Here are some of the references in the New Testament to the Deuterocanonical works:

Matt. 2:16 - Herod's decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.

Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus' statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.

Matt.. 7:12 - Jesus' golden rule "do unto others" is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.

Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus' statement "you will know them by their fruits" follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.

Matt. 9:36 - the people were "like sheep without a shepherd" is same as Judith 11:19 - sheep without a shepherd.

Matt. 11:25 - Jesus' description "Lord of heaven and earth" is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.

Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus' reference to the "power of death" and "gates of Hades" references Wisdom 16:13.

Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.

Matt. 24:15 - the "desolating sacrilege" Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.

Matt. 24:16 - let those "flee to the mountains" is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.

Matt. 27:43 - if He is God's Son, let God deliver him from His adversaries follows Wisdom 2:18.

Mark 4:5,16-17 - Jesus' description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.

Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.

Luke 1:42 - Elizabeth's declaration of Mary's blessedness above all women follows Uzziah's declaration in Judith 13:18.

Luke 1:52 - Mary's magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.

Luke 2:29 - Simeon's declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.

Luke 13:29 - the Lord's description of men coming from east and west to rejoice in God follows Baruch 4:37.

Luke 21:24 - Jesus' usage of "fall by the edge of the sword" follows Sirach 28:18.

Luke 24:4 and Acts 1:10 - Luke's description of the two men in dazzling apparel reminds us of 2 Macc. 3:26.

John 1:3 - all things were made through Him, the Word, follows Wisdom 9:1.

John 3:13 - who has ascended into heaven but He who descended from heaven references Baruch 3:29.

John 4:48; Acts 5:12; 15:12; 2 Cor. 12:12 - Jesus', Luke's and Paul's usage of "signs and wonders" follows Wisdom 8:8.

John 5:18 - Jesus claiming that God is His Father follows Wisdom 2:16.

John 6:35-59 - Jesus' Eucharistic discourse is foreshadowed in Sirach 24:21.

John 10:22 - the identification of the feast of the dedication is taken from 1 Macc. 4:59.

John 10:36 – Jesus accepts the inspiration of Maccabees as He analogizes the Hanukkah consecration to His own consecration to the Father in 1 Macc. 4:36.

John 15:6 - branches that don't bear fruit and are cut down follows Wis. 4:5 where branches are broken off.

Acts 1:15 - Luke's reference to the 120 may be a reference to 1 Macc. 3:55 - leaders of tens / restoration of the twelve.

Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Gal. 2:6 - Peter's and Paul's statement that God shows no partiality references Sirach 35:12.

Acts 17:29 - description of false gods as like gold and silver made by men follows Wisdom 13:10.

Rom 1:18-25 - Paul's teaching on the knowledge of the Creator and the ignorance and sin of idolatry follows Wis. 13:1-10.

Rom. 1:20 - specifically, God's existence being evident in nature follows Wis. 13:1.

Rom. 1:23 - the sin of worshipping mortal man, birds, animals and reptiles follows Wis. 11:15; 12:24-27; 13:10; 14:8.

Rom. 1:24-27 - this idolatry results in all kinds of sexual perversion which follows Wis. 14:12,24-27.

Rom. 4:17 - Abraham is a father of many nations follows Sirach 44:19.

Rom. 5:12 - description of death and sin entering into the world is similar to Wisdom 2:24.

Rom. 9:21 - usage of the potter and the clay, making two kinds of vessels follows Wisdom 15:7.

1 Cor. 2:16 - Paul's question, "who has known the mind of the Lord?" references Wisdom 9:13.

1 Cor. 6:12-13; 10:23-26 - warning that, while all things are good, beware of gluttony, follows Sirach 36:18 and 37:28-30.

1 Cor. 8:5-6 - Paul acknowledging many "gods" but one Lord follows Wis. 13:3.

1 Cor. 10:1 - Paul's description of our fathers being under the cloud passing through the sea refers to Wisdom 19:7.

1 Cor. 10:20 - what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God refers to Baruch 4:7.

1 Cor. 15:29 - if no expectation of resurrection, it would be foolish to be baptized on their behalf follows 2 Macc. 12:43-45.

Eph. 1:17 - Paul's prayer for a "spirit of wisdom" follows the prayer for the spirit of wisdom in Wisdom 7:7.

Eph. 6:14 - Paul describing the breastplate of righteousness is the same as Wis. 5:18. See also Isaiah 59:17 and 1 Thess. 5:8.

Eph. 6:13-17 - in fact, the whole discussion of armor, helmet, breastplate, sword, shield follows Wis. 5:17-20.

1 Tim. 6:15 - Paul's description of God as Sovereign and King of kings is from 2 Macc. 12:15; 13:4.

2 Tim. 4:8 - Paul's description of a crown of righteousness is similar to Wisdom 5:16.

Heb. 4:12 - Paul's description of God's word as a sword is similar to Wisdom 18:15.

Heb. 11:5 - Enoch being taken up is also referenced in Wis 4:10 and Sir 44:16. See also 2 Kings 2:1-13 & Sir 48:9 regarding Elijah.

Heb 11:35 - Paul teaches about the martyrdom of the mother and her sons described in 2 Macc. 7:1-42.

Heb. 12:12 - the description "drooping hands" and "weak knees" comes from Sirach 25:23.

James 1:19 - let every man be quick to hear and slow to respond follows Sirach 5:11.

James 2:23 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness follows 1 Macc. 2:52 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness.

James 3:13 - James' instruction to perform works in meekness follows Sirach 3:17.

James 5:3 - describing silver which rusts and laying up treasure follows Sirach 29:10-11.

James 5:6 - condemning and killing the "righteous man" follows Wisdom 2:10-20.

1 Peter 1:6-7 - Peter teaches about testing faith by purgatorial fire as described in Wisdom 3:5-6 and Sirach 2:5.

1 Peter 1:17 - God judging each one according to his deeds refers to Sirach 16:12 - God judges man according to his deeds.

2 Peter 2:7 - God's rescue of a righteous man (Lot) is also described in Wisdom 10:6.

Rev. 1:4 – the seven spirits who are before his throne is taken from Tobit 12:15 – Raphael is one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints before the Holy One.

Rev. 1:18; Matt. 16:18 - power of life over death and gates of Hades follows Wis. 16:13.

Rev. 2:12 - reference to the two-edged sword is similar to the description of God's Word in Wisdom 18:16.

Rev. 5:7 - God is described as seated on His throne, and this is the same description used in Sirach 1:8.

Rev. 8:3-4 - prayers of the saints presented to God by the hand of an angel follows Tobit 12:12,15.

Rev. 8:7 - raining of hail and fire to the earth follows Wisdom 16:22 and Sirach 39:29.

Rev. 9:3 - raining of locusts on the earth follows Wisdom 16:9.

Rev. 11:19 - the vision of the ark of the covenant (Mary) in a cloud of glory was prophesied in 2 Macc. 2:7.

Rev. 17:14 - description of God as King of kings follows 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 19:1 - the cry "Hallelujah" at the coming of the new Jerusalem follows Tobit 13:18.

Rev. 19:11 - the description of the Lord on a white horse in the heavens follows 2 Macc. 3:25; 11:8.

Rev. 19:16 - description of our Lord as King of kings is taken from 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 21:19 - the description of the new Jerusalem with precious stones is prophesied in Tobit 13:17.

Exodus 23:7 - do not slay the innocent and righteous - Dan. 13:53 - do not put to death an innocent and righteous person.

1 Sam. 28:7-20 – the intercessory mediation of deceased Samuel for Saul follows Sirach 46:20.

2 Kings 2:1-13 – Elijah being taken up into heaven follows Sirach 48:9.

2 Tim. 3:16 - the inspired Scripture that Paul was referring to included the deuterocanonical texts that the Protestants removed. The books Baruch, Tobit, Maccabees, Judith, Sirach, Wisdom and parts of Daniel and Esther were all included in the Septuagint that Jesus and the apostles used.

Sirach and 2 Maccabees – some Protestants argue these books are not inspired because the writers express uncertainty about their abilities. But sacred writers are often humble about their divinely inspired writings. See, for example, 1 Cor. 7:40 – Paul says he “thinks” that he has the Spirit of God.

None of the Church fathers denied the inspiration of the Deuterocanonicals. Some critics of the Christian Bible claim that because these books were not included in their Canon list means that they did not deem them inspired. That is weak evidence at best and shows ignorance of what “canonical” meant to those in the early Church. Most often it only meant that it was not used in their liturgical practice and not because they believed they were not inspired. Also, none of them had the authority to speak for the whole Church as did the Synods and Councils such as Hippo and Carthage.

(Bourn Again) One of the earliest Christian lists of the Old Testament by Melito, the bishop of Sardis, in 170 AD lists all Old Testament books, except Esther and the entire deutercanonicals. Athanasius lists all books of the Old and New Testaments, again except Esther, and not a single deuterocanonical book. He mentioned some, yes, but then called them a teaching tool instead of Canonical!

The Jews of Palestine rejected the deuterocanonicals. Flavius Josephus excluded the deuterocanonicals. Philo quoted almost every OT book, but never the deuterocanonicals.

(Cristoiglesia) Of course the Canon was not decided until the completion of the three African Synods of Hippo and Carthage. So any lists they compiled was speculation and non-binding personal opinions which the Church had no obligation to adopt. The issue was settled at the African Synods.
As for Josephus, he was a Jewish historian and during His life the Christian Canon had not yet been decided. The same is true for Philo. Besides any opinion of theirs would not be binding on the Christian Church. Philo did use the Septuagint which contained the Deuterocanonicals so this argument backfires on you whether he quoted from the Deuterocanonicals or not.

(Bourn Again) There are also historical errors in the deuterocanonicals. As John Ankerberg and John Weldon summarized: "Tobit contains certain historical and geographical errors such as the assumption that the Sennacherib was the son of Shalmaneser (1:15) instead of Sargon II, and that Nineveh was captured by Nebuchadnezzar and Ahasuerus (14:5) instead of by Nabopolassar and Cyaxares.... Judith cannot possibly be historical because of the glaring errors it contains.... (in 2 Maccabees) there are also numerous disarrangements and discrepancies in chronological, historical, and numerical matters in the book, reflecting ignorance or confusion."
"Tobit was supposedly alive when Jeroboam staged his revolt in 931 BC and was still living at the time of the Assyrian captivity (722 BC), yet the book of Tobit says he lived only 158 years (Tobit 1:3-5; 14:11). Archeology has always agreed with the Old and New Testament.

(Cristoiglesia) “First, from a certain perspective, there are "errors" in the deuterocanonical books. The book of Judith, for example, gets several points of history and geography wrong. Similarly Judith, that glorious daughter of Israel, lies her head off (well, actually, it's wicked King Holofernes' head that comes off). And the Angel Raphael appears under a false name to Tobit. How can Catholics explain that such "divinely inspired" books would endorse lying and get their facts wrong? The same way we deal with other incidents in Scripture where similar incidents of lying or "errors" happen.
Let's take the problem of alleged "factual errors" first. The Church teaches that to have an authentic understanding of Scripture we must have in mind what the author was actually trying to assert, the way he was trying to assert it, and what is incidental to that assertion.
For example, when Jesus begins the parable of the Prodigal Son saying, "There was once a man with two sons," He is not shown to be a bad historian when it is proven that the man with two sons He describes didn't actually exist. So too, when the prophet Nathan tells King David the story of the "rich man" who stole a "poor man's" ewe lamb and slaughtered it, Nathan is not a liar if he cannot produce the carcass or identify the two men in his story. In strict fact, there was no ewe lamb, no theft, and no rich and poor men. These details were used in a metaphor to rebuke King David for his adultery with Bathsheba. We know what Nathan was trying to say and the way he was trying to say it. Likewise, when the Gospels say the women came to the tomb at sunrise, there is no scientific error here. This is not the assertion of the Ptolemiac theory that the sun revolves around the earth. These and other examples which could be given are not "errors" because they're not truth claims about astronomy or historical events.
Similarly, both Judith and Tobit have a number of historical and geographical errors, not because they're presenting bad history and erroneous geography, but because they're first-rate pious stories that don't pretend to be remotely interested with teaching history or geography, any more than the Resurrection narratives in the Gospels are interested in astronomy. Indeed, the author of Tobit goes out of his way to make clear that his hero is fictional. He makes Tobit the uncle of Ahiqar, a figure in ancient Semitic folklore like "Jack the Giant Killer" or "Aladdin." Just as one wouldn't wave a medieval history textbook around and complain about a tale that begins "once upon a time when King Arthur ruled the land," so Catholics are not reading Tobit and Judith to get a history lesson.
Very well then, but what of the moral and theological "errors"? Judith lies. Raphael gives a false name. So they do. In the case of Judith lying to King Holofernes in order to save her people, we must recall that she was acting in light of Jewish understanding as it had developed until that time. This meant that she saw her deception as acceptable, even laudable, because she was eliminating a deadly foe of her people. By deceiving Holofernes as to her intentions and by asking the Lord to bless this tactic, she was not doing something alien to Jewish Scripture or Old Testament morality. Another biblical example of this type of lying is when the Hebrew midwives lied to Pharaoh about the birth of Moses. They lied and were justified in lying because Pharaoh did not have a right to the truth — if they told the truth, he would have killed Moses. If the book of Judith is to be excluded from the canon on this basis, so must Exodus.
With respect to Raphael, it's much more dubious that the author intended, or that his audience understood him to mean, "Angels lie. So should you." On the contrary, Tobit is a classic example of an "entertaining angels unaware" story (cf. Heb. 13:2). We know who Raphael is all along. When Tobit cried out to God for help, God immediately answered him by sending Raphael. But, as is often the case, God's deliverance was not noticed at first. Raphael introduced himself as "Azariah," which means "Yahweh helps," and then rattles off a string of supposed mutual relations, all with names meaning things like "Yahweh is merciful"Yahweh gives," and "Yahweh hears." By this device, the author is saying (with a nudge and a wink), "Psst, audience. Get it?" And we, of course, do get it, particularly if we're reading the story in the original Hebrew. Indeed, by using the name "Yahweh helps," Raphael isn't so much "lying" about his real name as he is revealing the deepest truth about who God is and why God sent him to Tobit. It's that truth and not any fluff about history or geography or the fun using an alias that the author of Tobit aims to tell.” (Mark P. Shea)

(Bourn Again) Now for the doctrines. The deuterocanonicals often disagree with the Bible.
The doctrine of mass: 2 Macc. 12:42-45 to Hebrews 7:27
The world was created by preexistent matter: Wisdom of Solomon to Genesis 1 and Psalms 33:9
The idea that giving alms to the poor can help atone for sins: Sirach 3:3, 3:30, 5:5, 20:28, 35:1-4, 45:16, 45:23 to Romans 3:20
The invocation and intervention of saints: 2 Macc. 15:14; Baruch 3:4 to Matt. 6:9
The worship of angels: Tobit 12:12 to Colossians 2:18
And finally, purgatory: 2 Macc. 12:42, 45 to Hebrews 9:27. I think I had mentioned before that it was based off of this.

(Cristoiglesia) The Deuterocanonicals are books of the Bible. How can they disagree with themselves? You need to show me the doctrines by which you think the Deuterocanonical books disagree and why. As for the Doctrine of Purgatory II Maccabees certainly does support the Doctrine but to say that it is based on II Maccabees is ignoring the vast Scriptural and theological basis for the Doctrine.

(Bourn again) Yes, the Septuagint does contain the deuterocanonicals, but not until about the fourth century after Christ. This suggest that the deuterocanonicals was not in the original Septuagint. This also may explain why although the apostles often quoted the Septuagint, they never quoted from the deuterocanonicals.

(Cristoiglesia) This is nonsense. The Septuagint always contained the Deuterocanonicals since before the Church was founded. The Canon of the Septuagint was the Canon of the Diaspora and the Essene Jews in its entirety including the deuterocanonical books. The Christian Bible was canonized in the late fourth century and it contained the same books we have today including the Deuterocanonicals.

(Bourn Again) Let’s look at the tests of canonicity:
1. Backed by an apostle/prophet- No
2. Is the book authoritive?- No, they never claim to be inspired, and 2 Macc. nearly admits that it was not.
3. Does it tell the truth about God and doctrine as it is already known by previous revelation- Bereans searched the OT to see if Paul's teaching was true (Acts 17:11). Galatians 1:8 shows that Paul recognized this too. The deuterocanonicals contradict other testimonies.

(Cristoiglesia) I have no idea what you mean by backed by an apostle and certainly not all books of the Bible claim inspiration. The Deuterocanonicals never disagree with any other Scriptures or Doctrines.

(Bourn Again) Does the book give evidence of having the power of God?- Real scriputre is alive and active (Hebrews 4:12). Many church fathers admitted that it did not have it, and was solely a teaching tool instead of the inspired word of God. I know you find the Bible to be a teaching tool, but it is so much more. It is the inspired word of God, and it is an insult to lower it to a textbook.

(Cristoiglesia) None of the Church Fathers denied the inspiration of Scriptures and certainly not the Deuterocanonicals. None of the Church Fathers denied that the Deuterocanonicals were not the Word of God. The Bible being a teaching tool is not an insult but testimony to its veracity.

(Bourn Again) 5. Was the book accepted by God's people? Many NT books were recognized as scripture around the time they were written, not canonized some 1500 years after they were written.

(Cristoiglesia) Yes, the Septuagint was the accepted Canon by the first Christians and certainly by the New Testament authors and Jesus. The Septuagint was the only Canon ever recognized by the Church and was canonized at the African Synods in the late fourth and early fifth centuries at the Synods of Hippo and Carthage. If you are referring to the Council of Trent, the Canon was only confirmed in response to the Protestant heretics that desired to remove any books that conflicted with their man-made doctrines in their efforts to combine Secular Humanism with Christianity. They wanted to remove New Testament books as well. In short, in the history of the Christian Church until the Reformation there was never a time when the Deuterocanonical books were not believed to be inspired Canon and used by the Church as such.

(Bourn Again) The only claim that the Roman Catholic church has of the apostles quoting the deuterocanonicals is Hebrews 11:35. This is compared to 2 Macc. 7. First off, this is not an exact quote, but an allusion if anything. There is never a clear quotation from the deuterocanonicals. Even if this was an allusion, this does not make it anymore inspired then "Bad company corrupts good character" from Thaïs is inspired because Paul used it in 1 Cor. 15:33.

(Cristoiglesia) See the list of references to the Septuagint provided above. By what authority does any Protestant have to question the authority given by Jesus to His Church? The answer is none.

God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

14 October, 2009

Discussion with "Bourn Again" about salvation

(Bourn Again) I've assumed that all who believe in Christ and repent are saved, but what if we withdraw that belief? I still think those who fall from grace do so because of disbelief, not sin, since we are saved by faith and not works.

(Cristoiglesia) I think that many times people fall from faith because they are trying to justify their desire for sin. Certainly the temptation of sin is strong and especially sexual sin and those sins motivated by greed. But the clear message from Scriptures and the teaching of the Church is that sin certainly does separate us from eternity. Of course some are more tempted by sin than others and St. Paul speaks of his thorn that constantly tempts him towards sin. He is not specific about what it is but we do get the feeling from His writings that we all have our own crosses to bear. Some of us accept these temptations as blessings that by recognizing them we are able to turn from them and others fall into the snare of our desires. I think we are all tempted and that sin does indeed separate us from God’s will and subsequently from our heavenly promise. Unrepentant sin will eventually cause our soul to die to Christ.

Certainly we are saved by faith and not works but we are not saved by faith alone. True salvific grace results in good works as they are an expression of love for others which accompanies the grace we receive. If one wants to recognize those not in His grace it is always revealed by their lack of love for others and their love for self.

(Bourn Again) If we are saved by faith we are condemned by lack of faith. Fortunately, I had never discussed this belief hard with someone before, so I did not lead any astray.

(Cristoiglesia) Certainly we are saved by faith and that initial salvific faith we receive is built upon through the work of the Holy Spirit continuing to appeal to the law written on our hearts. In the process our faith grows and the temptations of sin become easier to put aside as we are sanctified and justified through the Spirit. But, you are correct we must consciously turn from sin, and we do not fall from grace because there is insufficient salvific grace to keep us within God’s will and on the narrow path to salvation. I am afraid that I may have led others astray because of my rejection of Christ’s Church and my pride for not seeing what was obvious in hindsight as to the veracity of Christ’s Church. I constantly humble myself in prayer for forgiveness for my errors and my disobedience to His Church for so long. I pray that our Lord will have mercy on me for my obstinacy and as a result false teaching.

(Bourn Again) I still think I will be saved forever, but I must believe in Christ till I die. Before I had a system so that all who are truly saved die saved, and those who believe then fall away or stop believing never had a saving belief in the first place. So the good news from that is it set up the same result, just an askew way of looking at it.

(Cristoiglesia) I think that it is dangerous and makes us more vulnerable to temptation is we believe that it is our efforts to remain in His will that save us instead of it being more of grace. We must cooperate with the grace God provides but we must always be open to receive His ongoing grace that He provides for us. Surely this ongoing grace is the bread of life that we must receive which is His Body and Blood. Jesus compared this to the manna that sustained the Israelites and instructs us that it is real food which provides our endurance in God’s will and grace. Receiving of His great feast makes us strong to fight the temptations that can cause us to fall from grace never to reconcile back into the familial relationship which sustains us in His will.

Certainly we have all seen those who appeared to be recipients of God’s salvific grace that failed to live out the fruits of that grace. Surely some were not as they appeared but there are others who truly came to faith and truly received His grace that subsequently was not sustained because they succumbed to their temptation and fell away, their desire being stronger for sin than for God’s grace.

(Bourn Again) I still disagree with some Catholic beliefs, and I still don't think we need works for salvation, but I do think that true faith's effect is works. Do you think this is right, or my previous belief. If you disagree with both, which is closer?

(Cristoiglesia) Catholics would agree with you about not needing works for salvation but we do know also that works are evidence of salvific grace in our hearts and lives. We can never believe that our works are of ourselves but that they are the result of a response to grace.

(Bourn Again) Thanks for talking this stuff over with me. I acctually had believed that we could fall from grace before, until I meet a calvanist who thought otherwise. I think he looks at the askewed version, so in the end he believes in the same effect, so thats a plus.

(Cristoiglesia) Sometimes we speak different languages but come to the same conclusions. I do believe that free will is an essential Christian belief but that the belief in predestination is not a belief that in itself will keep us from final salvation. It is when it is developed to its fullest potential into Antinomianism that it becomes heretical and will if not realized make us more vulnerable to temptation and result in us falling permanently into sin while still believing that we are in God’s unrelenting grace regardless of our sin. As St. Paul warned we must work out our salvation with fear and trembling. It is just too easy for Satan to appeal to our pride and to cause us to fall into the sin of presumption. Can a Calvinist be saved? Of course, but his belief becomes a stumbling block to continuing faith and subsequently to ongoing salvific grace.

(Bourn Again) If we are believe in Christ and have repented we are saved, but if we later withdraw that belief we will not still be saved. I believe in the permenance of salvation as far as sins do not destroy it, but disbelief does. Am I looking at this right? Thanks.
God bless!

(Cristoiglesia) Correct, God does not force us to continue in faith. We are free to reject His grace at any time. As a result God will not save us as we have condemned ourselves by our lack of faith. The Bible tells us that there is no excuse for disbelief. Where we may disagree is that I believe that sin does indeed have an effect on our salvation. Sin will cause our souls to die to Christ if we remain unrepentant. That is why the Sacrament of Reconciliation is so important so that sin does not seduce our will to the point that we do not respond to the work of the Spirit appealing to the law on our hearts to bring us back into Gods will when we fall into sin. We sin because sin satisfies our carnal senses and we remain in faith because our spiritual senses are satisfied and our heart is at peace with God. But, both sin and faith require a response from us but it is grace and grace alone that prompts us to reject sin. The embracing of sin is a faith in ourselves alone and a rejection of God which indeed separates us from His will and His heavenly promise. God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

09 October, 2009

Continuing discussion with "Chrispy" about his revisionist history of the Church

(Chrispy) The Church was never just a building. It was a group of believers who followed Jesus and His teachings from the Bible...

(Cristoiglesia) The invisible Church are those who have faith in our Lord but one cannot discern who are a part of His invisible Church. However, Jesus and the disciples founded a visible Church and we see the formation of that Church in the book of Acts. This Church is the Catholic Church and is the self-same Church that Jesus prayed that we would all be one within. Otherwise as professed Christians and not being obedient to His Church would place us outside of His will, blessings, promises and grace; if not fully but in great measure. Those outside of His will would be those that some describe as "playing" at Christianity and not following Jesus.

There are some outside of the visible Church which some call a "remnant" that are not be on the path to the narrow gate but may be saved by God's mercy. These are those who seek God but are deceived into being outside of His visible Church by no fault of their own. While not a part of the visible Church they can be considered a part of the invisible Church. So, Jesus and the disciples formed a visible Church as we see after Pentecost recorded in the book of Acts and it could be said that there are those known only to God who are a part of that visible Church against their will or knowledge that will be received in Glory to be a part of the Church Triumphant. But, as one can see in Scripture this is not the ordinary way to be saved through His Church but as an extraordinary example of His mercy.

The gates of hell will never prevail against His visible Church because of the protection of the Church by the Holy Spirit given at Pentecost. The Church is other worldly and heavenly in its nature and is endowed with its holiness and veracity from its founder Jesus. Jesus gave His promises to His visible Church so that the world could see the testimony of His Church as the pillar and ground of the truth and a shining city on a hill (Mat 5:14) It is the will of God that all should be saved by and through His Church as it is the Church that was commissioned to spread the Gospel throughout the world both corporeally and individually. The Church is a refuge and the Ark from the sins and temptations of the world. It is heaven on earth where Christ dwells in the Tabernacles and is worshipped. So if the visible Church ceased to exist it would make Jesus a liar and a pretender as the Messiah and Savior of the world because all of His promises would be proven false.

Unity requires that there be a knowledge and physical manifestation of that unity. That is the Catholic Church which is the visible Church. The invisible Church does not represent unity because it is known only to God which may be unified in faith but not in purpose.

The purpose of the Church is its testimony in spreading the "good news" to the world. That requires a visible unity. The world will never know if those who are in the invisible Church are preserved but the visible Church will always be the witness to the world that it remains after empires and governments have fallen, political ideologies have been born and died and false and counterfeit religions have come and gone. It is a testimony that Jesus is God of the Trinity and that His will be done on earth as well as in heaven regardless of the snares of Satan and His lies against humanity.

(Chrispy) The Seventh Day Sabbath (changed in 364AD)

(Cristoiglesia) No, I gave you the history of the Church adopting the Lord’s Day as the day of worship in the previous discussion.

(Chrispy) Here is some History of the Church. During the Dark Ages, Christians believing in Christ were persecuted for their beliefs by the Romans.

(Cristoiglesia) No, the persecution of Christians occurred before the beginning of the Dark Ages. The practice was stopped by the Emperor Constantine who ended it with the Edict of Milan. He ordered freedom of religion in the Empire.

(Chrispy) Christianity was being stomped out of existence by Paganism.

(Cristoiglesia) Actually Christianity was growing despite persecution.

(Chrispy) In 321AD the Roman Emperor Constantine was "converted" and decided that he wanted to convert Rome as well.. So he marched 1000 Pagan soldiers through a river and "baptized" them into Christianity. He Christianized Paganism...After this he went around naming everything Christian names, and even gave all his soldiers Christian names too. Effectually though he did not bapitze his soldiers, but only made them "wet Pagans".

(Cristoiglesia) The Emperor Constantine did not convert to Christianity after the Edict of Milan but remained a sun worshipper until His deathbed when legend says he did convert. But He did stop the persecution of Christians and even recruited Christians into his military. I never read where he marched 1000 soldiers into the river and called them baptized and I would like to see a source for this legend. Christianity did experience great growth as a result of being accepted in the Empire but Constantine did little to promote Christianity even though his mother was a Christian. He certainly did not encourage the pagans to become Christians.

(Chrispy) Now Christianity suddenly went from being the minority to being the majority, literally over night. Even the Statue of "Peter" was there before Peter was born. This statue was one among many things renamed by Constantine in an attempt at government reform. Constantine was not said to have a "full" conversion until on his death bed. Pagan/Christians now had the majority and forced Pagan beliefs on the few Christians who were left. These faithful Christians were deemed "heretics" by the Church and sentenced to death at the Church's convenience. Those were the Dark Ages. Constantine was the Roman Emperor who became CHRISTIAN, and then decided that EVERYONE was going to be Christian too.. so it went from pagans murdering Christians, to pagans becoming Christians, to Pagans who say they are Christians murdering Christians.. this is how the popularity of Catholicism was born.... by FORCE... back then there was one church.. the Roman church or NO church.

(Cristoiglesia) The Roman state did not suddenly become Christian as you say but it was attractive to the educated populace who were familiar with Greek and Roman philosophy. What appealed to the populace the most was the order of Christianity and the moral example provided by the faith as opposed to the immoral actions of their pagan gods. Conversion of the pagans occurred quickly as a result of people having a choice and not because any religion was favored over another. There is no evidence of any kind of Pagan takeover of Christianity or forced Pagan beliefs on the Christians. In fact we do not see any real syncretism with Pagan practices. Certainly Christians were not the majority under the rule of Constantine. There is no historical evidence that any Christians were sentenced to death for not accepting Paganism as there was freedom of religion by edict from Constantine. There was no such thing as a state church under the Emperor Constantine. There was no Roman Church.

The statue of St. Peter has through the years had several theories or legends attached to it, none of which can be proven. One of those theories is that it is the statue of Jupiter and that the name was changed to Peter. Another is that a previous statue of a Greek god was melted to cast the statue of St. Peter. Personally I do not see that it matters, St. Peter is a known historical figure and not a god. The theory that it is a former statue of Jupiter was popularized among Catholic critics by Alexander Hislop in his anti-Catholic works two Babylon’s.

(Chrispy) . this allowed for many doctrines that are simply not taught to enter into our churches... the reformation exponged some of this, but there are still some minor(and some major) discrepencies regarding the doctrines taught by the Bible..

(Cristoiglesia) No, this never happened. Doctrines never change and have remained the same since Pentecost. There is no Catholic teaching that is contradictory to Scriptures. I suspect you know this since none are quoted or evidence given. What remains is just an empty accusation.

(Crispy) this all stemmed from the force of Religion/Government rules by the Catholics who got their power in 538AD in 538AD emperor Justinian left for Constantinople and gave the western part of his empire to the ARCH BISHOP OF ROME.. the arch bishop then proceeded to use his power to enforce government mandates regarding the free practice of religion.. and thus the world was truly plunged into the DARK AGES.

(Cristoiglesia) Well, the Catholoic Church has a different view of the Emperor Justinian than you. We saw him as a semi-Monophysite and a tyrant who opposed the Church. It is certainly false that he gave any power to the Bishop of Rome. I know of no proof of you allegations about Justinian’s reign and must see your historical account as just fanciful anti-Catholic revision.

(Chrispy) this ended when General Berthier of FRANCE in 1798AD marched on ROME and took the arch bishop of his throne where he dies in captivity. this opens the way for the reformation to blossom.

(Cristoiglesia) There is a little truth to your claim. There was a political battle over the sovereignty of the Papal States but you take on to a most ridiculous twist of history that destroys any attempt at being truthful. This event had noting to do with the Reformation

(Chrispy) This also gives full allowance during the exodus for Christian believers to escaping persecution and fleeing to the New World(America)

(Cristoiglesia) There was persecution on both sides and you seem to be trying to say that only the Protestants were being persecuted and this just is not true. Catholic Christians were being persecuted as well.

(Crispy) I am pretty dry when I present historical facts. I posess no animosity towards the Catholic Church or any other church. I simply see the Historical facts, and the history tells the story.

(Cristoiglesia) The fact that you twist history to make it fit your “facts” shows not only animosity but bigotry towards Christ’s Church. The truth is that what you call facts just are not.

(Chrispy) Constantine Christianized Paganism. This is part of the 4 horsemen of the Apocalypse. During Constantine's reign was the Sabbath changed to "honor the venerable day of the Sun" or "Sun god"... These things are FACTS... Just study history.

(Cristoiglesia) No, the facts do not match your prejudice no matter how hard you want them to match.

(Chrispy) The "heretics" exterminated by the Church in the Dark Ages were the minority because Constantine made Christianity popular to Pagans..

(Cristoiglesia) Nonsense!

(Chrispy) Again... Please study the history behind this top verify my statements. I don't speak to edify myself, but for the truth do I speak.

(Cristoiglesia) Sorry, your history does not match real history.

God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

Discussion with "Bourn Again" about confession and salvation

(Bourn again) "Membership in the Militia means complete dedication to the Kingdom of God and to the salvation of souls through Mary Immaculate." -Pope John Paul II

"We have an advocate in Mary that the father, Son, and Holy Spirit cannot say no to. It is impossible for them to say no to her! -Fr. Stephan Scheier

(Cristoiglesia) I assume you have some problem with these statements. It is difficult to respond unless I know why you think these statements are inappropriate. They are both speaking of the ministry of the blessed mother of God and how she intercedes for us by prayer for us.

(Bourn Again) Jesus never gave the power to forgive sins to the Apostles. No one can forgive sins except God (Mark 2:5-11).


(Mar 2:5) And when Jesus had seen their faith, he saith to the sick of the palsy: Son, thy sins are forgiven thee.

(Mar 2:6) And there were some of the scribes sitting there and thinking in their hearts:

(Mar 2:7) Why doth this man speak thus? He blasphemeth. Who can forgive sins, but God only?

(Mar 2:8) Which Jesus presently knowing in his spirit that they so thought within themselves, saith to them: Why think you these things in your hearts?

(Mar 2:9) Which is easier, to say to the sick of the palsy: Thy sins are forgiven thee; or to say: Arise, take up thy bed and walk?

(Mar 2:10) But that you may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins (he saith to the sick of the palsy):

(Mar 2:11) I say to thee: Arise. Take up thy bed and go into thy house.

I do not think that you do not believe that Jesus has the power to forgive sins. Certainly we both agree that He does and the verses you gave confirm this fact. If Jesus has this power a God I am sure that you can agree that He has other Divine powers as well. He exercises this power in giving the apostles and the successors the authority to forgive sins acting in persona Christi for He knew that this continuing authority would be needed in the ministry of His Church. But when one hears the Words of the priest that they are forgiven it is the will of Jesus that does the forgiving.

Christ instituted the sacraments purposefully. The sacrament called reconciliation or penance is what we call our actions when we go to confession. Going to confession and confessing to a priest is the normative way of reconciling oneself back into God's family when we have committed a mortal sin. It is the biblical way corresponding to Jesus' teaching as recorded by the apostle John:
(Joh 20:22) When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost.

(Joh 20:23) Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them: and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.

What we learn from John is the authority given to the priests is not only to forgive sins but also to retain sins. Jesus commanded the authority to be used. It is the duty given by Jesus for the priest to measure the contrition of the penitent and act accordingly.

However, one must repent and pray sincerely to God as an act of contrition before one enters the confessional. The priest represents Jesus by acting in persona Christi and for the entire family of God represented by the Church militant who is harmed by the sin of another. No sin is private but all sin affects others. Jesus described this relationship as a vine with Him as the vine and we as the branches (John 15:5). If one member of the branch is sick then all
the branches are affected and suffer as a result. Because of our familial relationship with each other Jesus created a means of confession so that all those affected in His family are represented by the priest as is God. The acts of sin and forgiveness are not private matters.

(Bourn again) We don't need to do penance to be saved either, so even if the church meant it in a different way, how many people are out there thinking if I don't do this, my sins aren't forgiven? Where does the church get off saying you have to do so and so, biblically speaking?

(Cristoiglesia) The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains it best:

1485 "On the evening of that day, the first day of the week," Jesus showed himself to his apostles. "He breathed on them, and said to them: 'Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained"' (Jn 20:19, 22-23).
1486 The forgiveness of sins committed after Baptism is conferred by a particular sacrament called the sacrament of conversion, confession, penance, or reconciliation.
1487 The sinner wounds God's honor and love, his own human dignity as a man called to be a son of God, and the spiritual well-being of the Church, of which each Christian ought to be a living stone.
1488 To the eyes of faith no evil is graver than sin and nothing has worse consequences for sinners themselves, for the Church, and for the whole world.
1489 To return to communion with God after having lost it through sin is a process born of the grace of God who is rich in mercy and solicitous for the salvation of men. One must ask for this precious gift for oneself and for others.
1490 The movement of return to God, called conversion and repentance, entails sorrow for and abhorrence of sins committed, and the firm purpose of sinning no more in the future. Conversion touches the past and the future and is nourished by hope in God's mercy.
1491 The sacrament of Penance is a whole consisting in three actions of the penitent and the priest's absolution. The penitent's acts are repentance, confession or disclosure of sins to the priest, and the intention to make reparation and do works of reparation.
1492 Repentance (also called contrition) must be inspired by motives that arise from faith. If repentance arises from love of charity for God, it is called "perfect" contrition; if it is founded on other motives, it is called "imperfect."
1493 One who desires to obtain reconciliation with God and with the Church, must confess to a priest all the unconfessed grave sins he remembers after having carefully examined his conscience. The confession of venial faults, without being necessary in itself, is nevertheless strongly recommended by the Church.
1494 The confessor proposes the performance of certain acts of "satisfaction" or "penance" to be performed by the penitent in order to repair the harm caused by sin and to re-establish habits befitting a disciple of Christ.
1495 Only priests who have received the faculty of absolving from the authority of the Church can forgive sins in the name of Christ.
1496 The spiritual effects of the sacrament of Penance are:
- reconciliation with God by which the penitent recovers grace;
- reconciliation with the Church;
- remission of the eternal punishment incurred by mortal sins;
- remission, at least in part, of temporal punishments resulting from sin;
- peace and serenity of conscience, and spiritual consolation;
- an increase of spiritual strength for the Christian battle.
1497 Individual and integral confession of grave sins followed by absolution remains the only ordinary means of reconciliation with God and with the Church.
1498 Through indulgences the faithful can obtain the remission of temporal punishment resulting from sin for themselves and also for the souls in Purgatory

(Bourn again) And when you were saying it was God who forgives through the preist, that would mean God would mediate through him. There is one mediator between God and man, Jesus.

(Cristoiglesia) No, the priest as I said before acts for Christ therefore he is not a mediator.

(Bourn again) The Catholic church contains many saved Christians, but it is not entirly correct. There are people in it who have fallen away. I hope for there sake that I am wrong, and you are right, but I have never heard Jesus say "you have the power to give sins and authority will be given you you succesors".

(Cristoiglesia) Catholic Christians are forbidden to assume who is to be saved and who is not. Salvation is based on the state of one’s soul at death. If one’s soul is sanctified and justified it will be saved. Only God can judge. It is difficult to deny that Christ’s authority given to the apostles is not passed down to their successors as we can clearly see this being done in the book of Acts. It is illogical that Jesus creating a Church that He promised would endure for all times free from apostasy and the “pillar and foundation of the truth” would not be given the continuing authority. This is truly the solid foundation Jesus spoke of with the disciples as the 12 foundation stones of the Church and Christ Himself as the high priest and cornerstone of the Church. Otherwise Jesus would have built His Church on a foundation os sand if it was not established to endure through apostolic succession.

(Bourn again) What would happen to me? I'd go to the unbiblical purgatory? Jesus saves us once and forever, even if we sin. If you are truly saved, you can never lose it. Of course there are the seeds that feel among the rocks, but I have accepted Jesus as my Lord and Savior, so there is no way I could lose it. If I am wrong in my accusation, I apologize, but this is what it sounds like to me what you are saying.

(Cristoiglesia) Of course we can lose our familial relationship with God. He does not force us to continue in our faith once received. Such teaching is not the teaching of our Lord or of Scriptures. If what you say was true even the demons would be saved as they believe. There are only two eternal destinations which are heaven and hell. Satan loves it when people believe in the heresy of Antinomianism like yourself as he has that person in his power and can and can easily tempt them into sin which will indeed separate one from their heavenly promise. A sinful soul cannot enter the presence of God.

Catholics believe that all of their works are produced by God. Once saved, always saved is a kind of lawless salvation where there is really no true sanctification but a covering up of a filthy sinful soul in the belief that it can sneak into heaven under the guise of holiness instead of actually having been sanctified and created anew. When one studies Scriptures, instead of using the Scriptures as a group of proof texts to support one’s fleshly desires, misunderstanding of God’s Word is less likely and false teaching is not promulgated. We should be more like the Bereans in not trusting those who are teaching us so that we will not fall for false teaching such as OSAS.

I know all the verses used to support lawless soteriology views. In view of contradictory Scripture how can a Calvinist support or justify their views. Allow me to illustrate what I mean with the following:

All through both Testaments of the Bible we are warned of the dangers of sin and that sin will separate us from eternity. The earliest verses making this point are as follows….

(Gen 2:16 DRB) And he commanded him, saying: Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat:

(Gen 2:17 DRB) But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.

If we examine verse 17 we see a striking similarity between hat Satan taught and what is taught by those teaching OSAS. They preach that we simply eat of the fruit of emotional ascension to faith for a moment in our lives and our consequent sins will not condemn us. Here is what the prophet Ezekiel says about a righteous man and see if it sounds like the righteous are guaranteed eternal security……

(Eze 3:20 DRB) Moreover if the just man shall turn away from his justice, and shall commit iniquity: I will lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die, because thou hast not given him warning: he shall die in his sin, and his justices which he hath done, shall not be remembered: but I will require his blood at thy hand.

(Eze 18:24 DRB) But if the just man turn himself away from his justice, and do iniquity according to all the abominations which the wicked man useth to work, shall he live? all his justices which he hath done, shall not be remembered: in the prevarication, by which he hath prevaricated, and in his sin, which he hath committed, in them he shall die.

The same teaching is repeated by St. Paul in His letter to the Romans lest one say that this prophecy only applies to the OC……

(Rom 8:13 DRB) For if you live according to the flesh, you shall die: but if by the Spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live.

(Rom 6:16 DRB) Know you not that to whom you yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants you are whom you obey, whether it be of sin unto death or of obedience unto justice.

St. Paul’s teaching is full of warnings against lawlessness and false security regarding our salvation as well as the teaching of St. James…….

(Gal 5:19 DRB) Now the works of the flesh are manifest: which are fornication, uncleanness, immodesty, luxury,

(Gal 5:20 DRB) Idolatry, witchcrafts, enmities, contentions, emulations, wraths, quarrels, dissensions, sects,

(Gal 5:21 DRB) Envies, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God.

(Gal 6:8 DRB) For what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap. For he that soweth in his flesh of the flesh also shall reap corruption. But he that soweth in the spirit of the spirit shall reap life everlasting.

(Gal 6:9 DRB) And in doing good, let us not fail. For in due time we shall reap, not failing.

(Jam 1:14 DRB) But every man is tempted by his own concupiscence, being drawn away and allured.

(Jam 1:15 DRB) Then, when concupiscence hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin. But sin, when it is completed, begetteth death.

(Jam 1:16 DRB) Do not err, therefore, my dearest brethren.

We know that both St. Paul and St. James were speaking to and about believers as St. James confirms in the following verses lest there be any doubt….

(Jam 5:19 DRB) My brethren, if any of you err from the truth and one convert him:

(Jam 5:20 DRB) He must know that he who causeth a sinner to be converted from the error of his way shall save his soul from death and shall cover a multitude of sins.

Jesus taught of the necessity of keeping the Word and of the consequences of not keeping the Word once received…..

(Joh 8:51 DRB) Amen, amen, I say to you: If any man keep my word, he shall not see death for ever.

(Joh 11:25 DRB) Jesus said to her: I am the resurrection and the life: he that believeth in me, although he be dead, shall live:

(Joh 11:26 DRB) And every one that liveth and believeth in me shall not die for ever. Believest thou this?

(Luk 8:13 DRB) Now they upon the rock are they who when they hear receive the word with joy: and these have no roots: for they believe for a while and in time of temptation they fall away.

Now, those teaching the false doctrine of OSAS will defend their views with saying that those who continue in lawlessness never were saved to begin with and it was a false eternal security that they received. The Bible clearly contradicts such a belief because it states that those who fell away were believers……..

(Act 17:11 DRB) Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, who received the word with all eagerness, daily searching the scriptures, whether these things were so.

(Act 17:12 DRB) And many indeed of them believed: and of honourable women that were Gentiles and of men, not a few.

Even St. Paul recognized that the righteous were in danger of falling away when He said:

(1Co 9:27 DRB) But I chastise my body and bring it into subjection: lest perhaps, when I have preached to others, I myself should become a castaway.

St. Paul clarified his view and teaching in the following ……

(Phi 2:12 DRB) Wherefore, my dearly beloved, (as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only but much more now in my absence) with fear and trembling work out your salvation.

Even in the salvation chair passage of John 3:16 and also John 11:25-26 we find that in the Greek that a continuing tense is used in the word believe which clearly shows that we must “continue to believe” and not a one time belief for eternal security.

Here are a few more verses that emphasize our continuing belief and sanctification and warnings that the faithful can and often do fall away…..

(Rev 3:2 DRB) Be watchful and strengthen the things that remain, which are ready to die. For I find not thy works full before my God.

(Rev 2:10 DRB) Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer. Behold, the devil will cast some of you into prison, that you may be tried: and you shall have tribulation ten days. Be thou faithful unto death: and I will give thee the crown of life.

(Rev 2:11 DRB) He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches: He that shall overcome shall not be hurt by the second death.

(1Jo 5:16 DRB) He that knoweth his brother to sin a sin which is not to death, let him ask: and life shall be given to him who sinneth not to death. There is a sin unto death. For that I say not that any man ask.

Obviously once saved always saved is an untenable theological position.

It seems as if you do not understand purgatory. This will explain it to you:

There is a common Protestant misunderstanding of purgatory. At least one protestant minister, John Wesley, spoke of perfectionism in this life, possible but rare. He is one of the few to proclaim that one can be sanctified in this life and he left the Moravian Church over this issue after a rebuke by Count Zinzendorf for this teaching.

People in purgatory are already justified by receiving the supernatural eternal life into our souls through Baptism making us a part of the Body of Christ. Those in purgatory have accepted Christ by faith and have not rejected Him by unrepentant mortal sin. It is a place where one is purified by fire (Mal 3:2). Imagine the joy of being in purgatory and knowing that you are there because you have passed judgment and are assured of being in the presence of God in heaven. Purgatory is not an eternal destination, there are only two, heaven or hell.

We should not think of purgatory as some kind of legal punishment for past sins as it would be under the old law. Those in purgatory are already new creatures changed by Christ’s grace, they are the adopted children and part of God’s family in purgatory one receives final discipline and cleansing preparing one for the perfection of heaven. Catholics believe that sanctification is a process and is not completed when one comes to belief. So purgatory is not a suggestion that Christ’s atonement is insufficient but that we have not yet completed our sanctification through the grace of Christ.

Cleansing or sanctification is a gradual process and we must endure to the end to be saved.

(Mat 10:22 DRB) And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake: but he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved.

(Mat 24:13 DRB) But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved.

(Mar 13:13 DRB) And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake. But he that shall endure unto the end, he shall be saved.

Catholic soteriology recognizes that for some of us the process was not completed at death or that we died with unrepentant sin.

(Heb 9:27 DRB) And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment:

The judgment is our eternal destiny and for those whose name is in the Lamb’s Book of Life, heaven is assured. But we know that one must be free of sin to be in God’s presence.

(1Ti 6:14 DRB) That thou keep the commandment without spot, blameless, unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,

It may be that one is not prepared to be in our Lord’s presence as we may still be with spiritual shortcomings or temporal effects of forgiven sins on our soul making it necessary for some form of purification to enter heaven in God’s presence. Since this is a process of purgation it is called purgatory and it is in keeping with prophecy of the prophet Habakkuk who said that only that which is holy may enter heaven.

(Hab 1:13 DRB) Thy eyes are too pure to behold evil, and thou canst not look on iniquity. Why lookest thou upon them that do unjust things, and holdest thy peace when the wicked devoureth the man that is more just than himself?

St. Paul also taught of a process of purgation which may involve suffering on the soul of Christians and in his first letter to the Corinthian Church he describes the process of purgation after death.

(1Co 3:10 DRB) According to the grace of God that is given to me, as a wise architect, I have laid the foundation: and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

(1Co 3:11 DRB) For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid: which is Christ Jesus.

(1Co 3:12 DRB) Now, if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble:

(1Co 3:13 DRB) Every man's work shall be manifest. For the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire. And the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is.

(1Co 3:14 DRB) If any man's work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

(1Co 3:15 DRB) If any mans work burn, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.

St. Paul speaks metaphorically that the results of sin that remain on one’s soul is like “wood, hay and straw” and are burned away in the process of final purification to be received in the presence of the Lord. St. Paul also speaks of one’s works as “gold, silver and precious stones” which are refined and retained.

This passage reminds me of what Christ said in the following indicating that some sins may be forgiven after death.

(Mat 12:32 DRB) And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world, nor in the world to come.

Purgatory is also related to the parable of the unforgiving servant which is as follows…

(Mat 18:32 DRB) Then his lord called him: and said to him: Thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all the debt, because thou besoughtest me:

(Mat 18:33 DRB) Shouldst not thou then have had compassion also on thy fellow servant, even as I had compassion on thee?

(Mat 18:34 DRB) And his lord being angry, delivered him to the torturers until he paid all the debt.

After telling the parable Christ emphasizes His message lest it be misunderstood with this warning……..

(Mat 18:35 DRB) So also shall my heavenly Father do to you, if you forgive not every one his brother from your hearts.

Christ was warning us of the danger of a hard heart or anger making us unwilling to forgive others. We should acknowledge that these are the signs and example of a defective soul in need of purgation so that he that is imperfect may be in the presence of God and dwell in glory. (See CCC 1030-1032)

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

07 October, 2009

Response by Steve to previous discussion

(Steve) Is there even any proof, that Peter had any contact with the church, Peter was given authority but when was this authority even given to the church. I have tried to research whether Peter was ever part of a clergy or even had contact with the catholic church but I have found nothing on either side.

(Cristoiglesia) Yes there is a great deal of proof. St. Peter is mentioned throughout the New Testament. The Church is defined as those who gather around the bishop. (St. Ignatius of Antioch about 107) St. Ignatius was a disciple of St. John and St. Peter and the third bishop of Antioch which is a Church founded by St. Peter. Read the seven epistles of St. Ignatius.

Mat 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

The following verse gives St. Peter all authority of binding and loosing. Which continues in the Church through apostolic succession.

Mat 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

(Steve) The trinity is a corruption, Jesus is a man of great importance but not God. Jesus:
-prayed to God
-depended on his parents and food
-said he didn't have knowledge that God does
I will greatly debate the trinity as I see it as polytheism.

(Cristoiglesia) Please research the two natures of Christ. He was fully man and fully God. Had He not been then He was not the Lamb of God prophesied. Such a supposition as yours would make Jesus a liar and an imposter. He was not. The Trinity is not polytheism in any way. The Church settled this issue at the Council of Nicaea as the heretics under Arius were found in anthema.

(Steve) When I talk about a corrupted Bible, I refer to the Tanahh or Old Testament, the church translated the a translation and ignored the Hebrew original. I have been learning Hebrew to see how an ancient Hebrew would see it and it is quite different.

(Cristoiglesia) There is no Hebrew original. The Church cannot ignore what it does not have. I do know Hebrew.

(Steve) On Paul and Torah observance, Jesus says in Matthew 5:17, that the Torah is not being abolished but fufilled which doesn't mean that he fufilled it on the cross rather, he abolished stoning, discouraged divorce and, endorsed peace.

(Cristoiglesia) What is not binding in the New Covenant are the Mosaic laws.

(Steve) He says anyone who teaching contrary to the Torah is the least in the kingdom, this definitly applies to Paul who has no authority not to mention his sexism, man and woman have a place, equal to eachother, this is what is right.

(Cristoiglesia) The first Council of Jerusalem confirms the teaching authority of St. Paul.

(Steve) The pope definitly does live in splendour, with a big hat to show authority, a ring people kiss, bullet-proof limo and etc.

(Cristoiglesia) No splendor at all, he lives very modestly. You can go online to the Vatican website and see his tiny apartment for yourself. Do you really think that the Pope should not be protected from assassins? The pope does have the authority from Christ Himself.

(Steve) Also, catholics pray to saints and idols which is wrong pray to the one God above. The commandments say no idols.

(Cristoiglesia) Yes we do ask the saints to pray for us. The Bible instructs us to pray for each other. It is not forbidden anywhere in Scriptures. There are no idols in the Church as Catholics are forbidden to practice idolatry. We do not worship anyone or anything but God. So we follow all of the commandments in the Decalogue.


God bless!

In Christ
Fr. Joseph

05 October, 2009

Discussion with "Chrispy's" about Soul Sleep and the Sabbath

(Chrispy) Telling people that they will not die is perhaps the worst lie we have fed into. I don't want the blog. I want what the Bible has to say. The Bible is the authority.

(Cristoiglesia) Of course the Bible does not teach that it is the authority instead it teaches that the Church is the authority represented by the bishops in apostolic succession. So, you are using the wrong authority in your interpretation. If you had gone to my blog you would have seen a Scriptural refutation of the heretical doctrine of “Soul Sleep”. Here it is if you dare to read it:

The Scriptures are very clear that our souls are immortal. Some will say that the soul is not immortal such as Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah Witnesses. Their doctrine is used to deny the existence of saints in heaven and thus the “Communion of Saints.”

(Isa 14:9 DRB) Hell below was in an uproar to meet thee at thy coming, it stirred up the giants for thee. All the princes of the earth are risen up from their thrones, all the princes of nations.

(Isa 14:10 DRB) All shall answer, and say to thee: Thou also art wounded as well as we, thou art become like unto us.

(Isa 14:11 DRB) Thy pride is brought down to hell, thy carcass is fallen down: under thee shall the moth be strewed, and worms shall be thy covering.

(Isa 14:12 DRB) How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, who didst rise in the morning? how art thou fallen to the earth, that didst wound the nations?

(Isa 14:13 DRB) And thou saidst in thy heart: I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God, I will sit in the mountain of the covenant, in the sides of the north.

(Isa 14:14 DRB) I will ascend above the height of the clouds, I will be like the most High.

(Isa 14:15 DRB) But yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, into the depth of the pit.

(Isa 14:16 DRB) They that shall see thee, shall turn toward thee, and behold thee. Is this the man that troubled the earth, that shook kingdoms,

(Isa 14:17 DRB) That made the world a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof, that opened not the prison to his prisoners?

(1Pe 3:19 DRB) In which also coming he preached to those spirits that were in prison:

In both the verses from Isaiah and the verses from 1 Peter they indicate that the dead are conscious. Could Christ have preached to the spirits in heaven if they were asleep? Of course, He could not.

The following verses further contradict Ellen White’s and Charles Russell’s theory that the soul sleeps until the Parousia. Death simply allows the saint to be present with the Lord. The body is just a tent that does not last and man cannot kill the soul which lives after the death of our bodies and the saints in heaven offer our prayers to God while living in happiness.

(2Co 5:8 DRB) But we are confident and have a good will to be absent rather from the body and to be present with the Lord.

(2Co 5:1 DRB) For we know, if our earthly house of this habitation be dissolved, that we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in heaven.

(2Co 5:2 DRB) For in this also we groan, desiring to be clothed upon with our habitation that is from heaven.

(2Co 5:3 DRB) Yet so that we be found clothed, not naked.

(2Co 5:4 DRB) For we also, who are in this tabernacle, do groan, being burthened; because we would not be unclothed, but clothed upon, that that which is mortal may be swallowed up by life.

(2Pe 1:13 DRB) But I think it meet, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance.

(Mat 10:28 DRB) And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell.

(Rev 6:9 DRB) And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held.

(Rev 6:10 DRB) And they cried with a loud voice, saying: How long, O Lord (Holy and True), dost thou not judge and revenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?

(Rev 6:11 DRB) And white robes were given to every one of them one; And it was said to them that they should rest for a little time till their fellow servants and their brethren, who are to be slain even as they, should be filled up.

(Rev 5:8 DRB) And when he had opened the book, the four living creatures and the four and twenty ancients fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

(Rev 14:13 DRB) And I heard a voice from heaven, saying to me: Write: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord. From henceforth now, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours. For their works follow them.

We also learn from Scriptures that the soul lives eternal in hell as well as heaven:

(Rev 14:11 DRB) And the smoke of their torments, shall ascend up for ever and ever: neither have they rest day nor night, who have adored the beast and his image and whoever receiveth the character of his name.

(Mat 25:41 DRB) Then he shall say to them also that shall be on his left hand: Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire, which was prepared for the devil and his angels.

(Mat 25:42 DRB) For I was hungry and you gave me not to eat: I was thirsty and you gave me not to drink.

(Mat 25:43 DRB) I was a stranger and you took me not in: naked and you covered me not: sick and in prison and you did not visit me.

(Mat 25:44 DRB) Then they also shall answer him, saying: Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison and did not minister to thee?

(Mat 25:45 DRB) Then he shall answer them, saying: Amen: I say to you, as long as you did it not to one of these least, neither did you do it to me.

(Mat 25:46 DRB) And these shall go into everlasting punishment: but the just, into life everlasting.

(Luk 16:19 DRB) There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and feasted sumptuously every day.

(Luk 16:20 DRB) And there was a certain beggar, named Lazarus, who lay at his gate, full of sores,

(Luk 16:21 DRB) Desiring to be filled with the crumbs that fell from the rich man's table. And no one did give him: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

(Luk 16:22 DRB) And it came to pass that the beggar died and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom. And the rich man also died: and he was buried in hell.

(Luk 16:23 DRB) And lifting up his eyes when he was in torments, he saw Abraham afar off and Lazarus in his bosom:

(Luk 16:24 DRB) And he cried and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water to cool my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame.

(Luk 16:25 DRB) And Abraham said to him: Son, remember that thou didst receive good things in thy lifetime, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted and thou art tormented.

(Luk 16:26 DRB) And besides all this, between us and you, there is fixed a great chaos: so that they who would pass from hence to you cannot, nor from thence come hither.

(Luk 16:27 DRB) And he said: Then, father, I beseech thee that thou wouldst send him to my father's house, for I have five brethren,

(Luk 16:28 DRB) That he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torments.

(Luk 16:29 DRB) And Abraham said to him: They have Moses and the prophets. Let them hear them.

(Luk 16:30 DRB) But he said: No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will do penance.

(Luk 16:31 DRB) And he said to him: If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe, if one rise again from the dead.

(Mar 9:42 DRB) (9:41) And whosoever shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me: it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and he were cast into the sea.

(Mar 9:43 DRB) (9:42) And if thy hand scandalize thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life, maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into unquenchable fire:

(Mar 9:44 DRB) (9:43) Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished.

(Mar 9:45 DRB) (9:44) And if thy foot scandalize thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter lame into life everlasting than having two feet to be cast into the hell of unquenchable fire:

(Mar 9:46 DRB) (9:45) Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished.

(Mar 9:47 DRB) (9:46) And if thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee with one eye to enter into the kingdom of God than having two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire:

(Mar 9:48 DRB) (9:47) Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not extinguished.

(Mat 18:8 DRB) And if thy hand, or thy foot, scandalize thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee. It is better for thee to go into life maimed or lame, than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into everlasting fire.

(Mat 8:12 DRB) But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into the exterior darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Certainly one can see from all the evidence in Scriptures that soul sleep is not a supportable doctrine.

(Chrispy's) "For the Lord Himself will descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, with the trump of God: and the DEAD IN CHRIST WILL RISE FIRST: 17. Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." 1 Thes 4:16, 17
How do the dead in Christ rise if they are on heaven already?

(Cristoiglesia) The sanctified souls go immediately to heaven upon death

2Co 5:8 But we are confident and have a good will to be absent rather from the body and to be present with the Lord.

At the Parousia our soul will be reunited with our glorified bodies.

(Chrispy's) I still don't understand the "heresy" part.

(Cristoiglesia) A heresy is a belief outside of orthodox Christian teaching

(Chrispy's) If you want to email someone, you need to use more Bible verses friend. You are a priest, so you know your Bible right? Show me where God says we have an immortal soul.Most people attempt to give evidence that we have a soul, but the Bible states that we "ARE" a living soul... Not that we "have" a soul...

Notice Genesis chapter two where God creates Adam and then he "became" a living soul "after" the breath of life was breathed into Him. (Genesis 2:7)

Dust+ Breath of life(spirit)=Living Soul

Living soul - Spirit (breath of life)=Dust

(Cristoiglesia) Our body and our soul make up a “living soul”. This is the orthodox teaching of Scriptures.

(Chrispy's) The Sabbath? Heresy?
When was the Sabbath instituted? Sinai or in Garden of Eden? Notice that Sinai was 2500 years later Who changed the Sabbath? The Catholic Church
have you read your Catechism? 3rd edition page 174?

(Cristoiglesia)One of the things that the Seventh Day Adventists fail to acknowledge is that the practice of worship on the first day of the week is as old as Christianity and was instituted by the Apostles. It is important to recognize that this is eisegesis on their part supporting instead of the Ten Commandments the teaching of their prophetess and founder Ellen Gould White. They would say that this practice, which is as old as Christianity, is a violation of God’s eternal decree. Let us go to Scriptures and see if the evidence is there to support their conclusions.

Let us look at the basis, other than Ms. White’s visions, that SDA’s have this belief and criticism of the orthodox belief in observing the first day of the week instead of the Sabbath. According to Scriptures this is the “perpetual covenant” that was given to man through all ages. Therefore according to history the Jew’s have observed the Sabbath in commemoration of our Lord’s rest after creation. These are the verses in regards to the pre-Christian practice:

(Exo 20:8 DRB) Remember that thou keep holy the sabbath day.

(Exo 20:9 DRB) Six days shalt thou labour, and shalt do all thy works.

(Exo 20:10 DRB) But on the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: thou shalt do no work on it, thou nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy beast, nor the stranger that is within thy gates.

(Exo 31:16 DRB) Let the children of Israel keep the sabbath, and celebrate it in their generations. It is an everlasting covenant

(Exo 31:17 DRB) Between me and the children of Israel, and a perpetual sign. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and in the seventh he ceased from work.

(Exo 31:18 DRB) And the Lord, when he had ended these words in Mount Sinai, gave to Moses two stone tables of testimony, written with the finger of God.

(Deu 5:12 DRB) Observe the day of the sabbath, to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee.

(Gen 2:1 DRB) So the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the furniture of them.

(Gen 2:2 DRB) And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made: and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done.

(Gen 2:3 DRB) And he blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

(Gen 2:4 DRB) These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the heaven and the earth:

(Gen 2:5 DRB) And every plant of the field before it sprung up in the earth, and every herb of the ground before it grew: for the Lord God had not rained upon the earth; and there was not a man to till the earth.

(Gen 2:6 DRB) But a spring rose out of the earth, watering all the surface of the earth.

(Gen 2:7 DRB) And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth: and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul.

(Gen 2:8 DRB) And the Lord God had planted a paradise of pleasure from the beginning: wherein he placed man whom he had formed.

(Gen 2:9 DRB) And the Lord God brought forth of the ground all manner of trees, fair to behold, and pleasant to eat of: the tree of life also in the midst of paradise: and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

(Gen 2:10 DRB) And a river went out of the place of pleasure to water paradise, which from thence is divided into four heads.

(Gen 2:11 DRB) The name of the one is Phison: that is it which compasseth all the land of Hevilath, where gold groweth.

(Gen 2:12 DRB) And the gold of that land is very good: there is found bdellium, and the onyx stone.

(Gen 2:13 DRB) And the name of the second river is Gehon: the same is it that compasseth all the land of Ethiopia.

(Gen 2:14 DRB) And the name of the third river is Tigris: the same passeth along by the Assyrians. And the fourth river is Euphrates.

(Gen 2:15 DRB) And the Lord God took man, and put him into the paradise of pleasure, to dress it, and to keep it.

(Gen 2:16 DRB) And he commanded him, saying: Of every tree of paradise thou shalt eat:

(Gen 2:17 DRB) But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. For in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.

(Gen 2:18 DRB) And the Lord God said: It is not good for man to be alone: let us make him a help like unto himself.

(Gen 2:19 DRB) And the Lord God having formed out of the ground all the beasts of the earth, and all the fowls of the air, brought them to Adam to see what he would call them: for whatsoever Adam called any living creature the same is its name.

(Gen 2:20 DRB) And Adam called all the beasts by their names, and all the fowls of the air, and all the cattle of the field: but for Adam there was not found a helper like himself.

(Gen 2:21 DRB) Then the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon Adam: and when he was fast asleep, he took one of his ribs, and filled up flesh for it.

(Gen 2:22 DRB) And the Lord God built the rib which he took from Adam into a woman: and brought her to Adam.

(Gen 2:23 DRB) And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man.

(Gen 2:24 DRB) Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh.

(Gen 2:25 DRB) And they were both naked: to wit, Adam and his wife: and were not ashamed.

(Gen 3:1 DRB) Now the serpent was more subtle tha any of the beasts of the earth which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman: Why hath God commanded you, that you should not eat of every tree of paradise?

There have been those who will say that the Catholic Church abandoned this commandment and practice but such a claim is incorrect. Instead the Church transferred the third commandment to observe the Sabbath to the first day of the week and called it the “Lord’s day” to commemorate the fact that it is through his resurrection that we become a “new creation” as is stated in the following verses:

(Act 20:7 DRB) And on the first day of the week, when we were assembled to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, being to depart on the morrow. And he continued his speech until midnight.

(1Co 16:2 DRB) On the first day of the week, let every one of you put apart with himself, laying up what it shall well please him: that when I come, the collections be not then to be made.

(2Co 5:17 DRB) If then any be in Christ a new creature, the old things are passed away. Behold all things are made new.

(Gal 6:15 DRB) For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision: but a new creature.

In about the year 60AD the Didache records and instructs the Christians to gather together on the “Lord’s Day”. Evidence from the Church fathers are in the writings of Justin Martyr around 155 AD to the Roman Emperor that stated that the liturgy of the Eucharist is celebrated on the first day of the week instead of the Sabbath.

There are principally two reasons that the Church transferred the observance of the third commandment to the first day of the week. First of all this is the day that Christ rose from the dead:

(Mat 28:1 DRB) And in the end of the sabbath, when it began to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalen and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre.

(Joh 20:1 DRB) And on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalen cometh early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre: and she saw the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

The second reason is that the Church wanted to make clear their separation from Pharisaical Judaism which included ritualistic animal sacrifices because the ultimate and final sacrifice had occurred to take away the sins of the world. Christ’s sacrifice had replaced the Passover lamb which was slain and eaten as a symbol of sacrifice for sin. In addition we see that Christians also rejected other rituals of the Jews such as the Kosher food laws and dietary restrictions imposed by the law of Moses. Nor does the Christian Church observe Passover or the feast days as the following verses show:

(Joh 1:29 DRB) The next day, John saw Jesus coming to him; and he saith: Behold the Lamb of God. Behold him who taketh away the sin of the world.

(Joh 1:36 DRB) And beholding Jesus walking, he saith: Behold the Lamb of God.

(Deu 12:15 DRB) But if thou desirest to eat, and the eating of flesh delight thee, kill, and eat according to the blessing of the Lord thy God, which he hath given thee, in thy cities: whether it be unclean, that is to say, having blemish or defect: or clean, that is to say, sound and without blemish, such as may be offered, as the roe, and the hart, shalt thou eat it:

(Deu 12:16 DRB) Only the blood thou shalt not eat, but thou shalt pour it out upon the earth as water.

(Deu 12:17 DRB) Thou mayst not eat in thy towns the tithes of thy corn, and thy wine, and thy oil, the firstborn of thy herds and thy cattle, nor any thing that thou vowest, and that thou wilt offer voluntarily, and the firstfruits of thy hands:

(Deu 12:18 DRB) But thou shalt eat them before the Lord thy God in the place which the Lord thy God shall choose, thou and thy son and thy daughter, and thy manservant, and maidservant, and the Levite that dwelleth in thy cities: and thou shalt rejoice and be refreshed before the Lord thy God in all things, whereunto thou shalt put thy hand.

(Deu 12:19 DRB) Take heed thou forsake not the Levite all the time that thou livest in the land.

(Deu 12:20 DRB) When the Lord thy God shall have enlarged thy borders, as he hath spoken to thee, and thou wilt eat the flesh that thy soul desireth:

(Deu 12:21 DRB) And if the place which the Lord thy God shall choose, that his name should be there, be far off, thou shalt kill of thy herds and of thy flocks, as I have commanded thee, and shalt eat in thy towns, as it pleaseth thee.

(Deu 12:22 DRB) Even as the roe and the hart is eaten, so shalt thou eat them: both the clean and unclean shall eat of them alike.

(Deu 12:23 DRB) Only beware of this, that thou eat not the blood, for the blood is for the soul: and therefore thou must not eat the soul with the flesh:

(Deu 12:24 DRB) But thou shalt pour it upon the earth as water,

(Deu 12:25 DRB) That it may be well with thee and thy children after thee, when thou shalt do that which is pleasing in the sight of the Lord.

(Deu 12:26 DRB) But the things which thou hast sanctified and vowed to the Lord, thou shalt take, and shalt come to the place which the Lord shall choose:

(Deu 12:27 DRB) And shalt offer thy oblations, the flesh and the blood upon the altar of the Lord thy God: the blood of thy victims thou shalt pour on the altar: and the flesh thou thyself shalt eat.

(Deu 12:28 DRB) Observe and hear all the things that I command thee, that it may be well with thee and thy children after thee for ever, when thou shalt do what is good and pleasing in the sight of the Lord thy God.

(Deu 14:3 DRB) Eat not the things that are unclean.

(Deu 14:4 DRB) These are the beasts that you shall eat, the ox, and the sheep, and the goat,

(Deu 14:5 DRB) The hart and the roe, the buffle, the chamois, the pygarg, the wild goat, the camelopardalus.

(Deu 14:6 DRB) Every beast that divideth the hoof in two parts, and cheweth the cud, you shall eat.

(Deu 14:7 DRB) But of them that chew the cud, but divide not the hoof, you shall not eat, such as the camel, the hare, and the cherogril: because they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof, they shall be unclean to you.

(Deu 14:8 DRB) The swine also, because it divideth the hoof, but cheweth not the cud, shall be unclean, their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch.

(Deu 14:9 DRB) These shall you eat of all that abide in the waters: All that have fins and scales, you shall eat.

(Deu 14:10 DRB) Such as are without fins and scales, you shall not eat, because they are unclean.

(Deu 14:11 DRB) All birds that are clean you shall eat.

(Deu 14:12 DRB) The unclean eat not: to wit, the eagle, and the grype, and the osprey,

(Deu 14:13 DRB) The ringtail, and the vulture, and the kite according to their kind:

(Deu 14:14 DRB) And all of the raven's kind:

(Deu 14:15 DRB) And the ostrich, and the owl, and the larus, and the hawk according to its kind:

(Deu 14:16 DRB) The heron, and the swan, and the stork,

(Deu 14:17 DRB) And the cormorant, the porphirion, and the night crow,

(Deu 14:18 DRB) The bittern, and the charadrion, every one in their kind: the houp also and the bat.

(Deu 14:19 DRB) Every thing that creepeth, and hath little wings, shall be unclean, and shall not be eaten.

(Deu 14:20 DRB) All that is clean, you shall eat.

(Deu 14:21 DRB) But whatsoever is dead of itself, eat not thereof. Give it to the stranger, that is within thy gates, to eat, or sell it to him: because thou art the holy people of the Lord thy God. Thou shalt not boil a kid in the milk of his dam.

(Col 2:16 DRB) Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink or in respect of a festival day or of the new moon or of the sabbaths,

(Col 2:17 DRB) Which are a shadow of things to come: but the body is of Christ.

(Col 2:18 DRB) Let no man seduce you, willing in humility and religion of angels, walking in the things which he hath not seen, in vain puffed up by the sense of his flesh:

(Col 2:19 DRB) And not holding the head, from which the whole body, by joints and bands, being supplied with nourishment and compacted, groweth into the increase of God.

(Col 2:20 DRB) If then you be dead with Christ from the elements of this world, why do you yet decree as though living in the world?

(Col 2:21 DRB) Touch not: taste not: handle not.

(Col 2:22 DRB) Which all are unto destruction by the very use, according to the precepts and doctrines of men.

(Col 2:23 DRB) Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in superstition and humility, and not sparing the body; not in any honour to the filling of the flesh.

This was all done by the earliest Christians to witness to others the true meaning of the Sabbath which came to complete fruition in the New Covenant of Christ, in whom we find true rest.

(Mat 11:28 DRB) Come to me all you that labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you.

The Old Covenant Sabbath with its temple ceremonies and animal sacrifices was an imperfect prefiguration of Christ’s perfect fulfillment through His New Covenant. The Old Covenant practices were only a copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary. As the Scriptures say once the perfect has come, the imperfect passed away. Just as Baptism replaced circumcision the Church saw the third commandment differently.

(Heb 8:5 DRB) Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things. As it was answered to Moses, when he was to finish the tabernacle: See (saith he) that thou make all things according to the pattern which was shewn thee on the mount.

(Heb 10:1 DRB) For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of the things, by the selfsame sacrifices which they offer continually every year, can never make the comers thereunto perfect.

The rituals of the Old Covenant are not binding on Christians according to St. Paul and he even rebuked Christians who continued with the Old covenant restrictions and ceremonies. In Christ, the demands and the observance of the Old Covenant demands and obligations of which the Sabbath are a part are no longer binding and have passed away, being replaced by the spiritual observance of the Sabbath of the New Covenant. One other thing, when the rich man asked what he must do to be saved Christ told him several commandments to follow and none were to keep holy the Sabbath.

(Gal 4:9 DRB) But now, after that you have known God, or rather are known by God: how turn you again to the weak and needy elements which you desire to serve again?

(Gal 4:10 DRB) You observe days and months and times, and years.

(Gal 4:11 DRB) I am afraid of you, lest perhaps I have laboured in vain among you.

(Col 2:16 DRB) Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink or in respect of a festival day or of the new moon or of the sabbaths,

(Col 2:17 DRB) Which are a shadow of things to come: but the body is of Christ.

(Mat 19:16 DRB) And behold one came and said to him: Good master, what good shall I do that I may have life everlasting?

(Mat 19:17 DRB) Who said to him: Why askest thou me concerning good? One is good, God. But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

(Mat 19:18 DRB) He said to him: Which? And Jesus said: Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness.

(Mat 19:19 DRB) Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

(Mat 19:20 DRB) The young man saith to him: All these have I kept from my youth, what is yet wanting to me?

(Mat 19:21 DRB) Jesus saith to him: If thou wilt be perfect, go sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

(Mat 19:22 DRB) And when the young man had heard this word, he went away sad: for he had great possessions.

Now, I have been told by our critics that the Catholic Church has no authority to change the third commandment but as I have pointed out Christ gave that authority as well as the teaching authority:

(Mat 18:18 DRB) Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.

(Luk 10:16 DRB) He that heareth you heareth me: and he that despiseth you despiseth me: and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.

(Mat 28:18 DRB) And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.

(Mat 28:19 DRB) Going therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.

(Mat 28:20 DRB) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.

Jesus made it very clear that He is the Lord of the Sabbath Day and stated that the day was made for man and not man for the Sabbath, that being true it would logically follow that the Church shares that authority as was said to Peter when He passed the keys:

(Mar 2:28 DRB) Therefore the Son of man is Lord of the sabbath also.

(Luk 6:5 DRB) And he said to them: The Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

(Mar 2:27 DRB) And he said to them: The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.

(Mat 10:40 DRB) He that receiveth you, receiveth me: and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me.

(Mat 16:19 DRB) And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

(Mat 18:18 DRB) Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.

(Mat 18:19 DRB) Again I say to you, that if two of you shall consent upon earth, concerning anything whatsoever they shall ask, it shall be done to them by my Father who is in heaven.

(Mat 18:20 DRB) For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Thee are other parallels in Church authority other than the observance of the Sabbath from the last until the first day of the week and in all cases it does not represent an abandonment of the law as Church critics would suggest but is rather a fulfillment of the law in a more perfect manner. We must remember what Christ said:

(Mat 5:17 DRB) Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

(Mat 5:18 DRB) For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled.

(Chrispy's) Forgive for all the messages, it is hard because there is a space limit. If you want me to stop, just let me know.

QUESTION: "Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
ANSWER: HAD SHE NOT SUCH POWER, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her, she could not have SUBSTITUED the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday, the Seventh Day, a change for which there is NO scriptural authority." Page 174..

The Sabbath was there at creation
Genesis 2:2, 3

The Sabbath will be worshiped on in Heaven
Isaiah 66:22, 23

Why would God ever change something eternal?
Look up the word "perpetual" in Exodus 31:16 in the Hebrew language. It means without end, forever, always, eternal,

There is a difference between God's law, and the Mosaic Law. BIG difference.
Again thank you for your time. I will check out you blog
You don't need to reciprocate if you don't want to.
Brother in Christ
-Chris L

(Cristoiglesia) Here is where Jesus gave the Church the authority to change:

Mat 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

The book of Acts shows where the first century Church worshipped the Eucharist on Sunday and proves that the practice was instituted under the authority given by Christ.

Thank you for your efforts in explaining your position. I appreciate the opportunity and the inspiration to contend for the Christian faith. May the Lord bless you abundantly and guide you to God’s will in His Church.

In Christ
Fr. Joseph