How is it that the Catholic Church is evil?

[Michie]

 

[bèlla]

This is why I don't get into these sorts of debates with other Trinitarian Christians. I'd rather just see us as one big, potentially happy family, if folks will just let it be.

You have to accept there will always be differences and how we handle them is the linchpin. I’m squarely in the do you camp. Whatever you feel is best for you and yours have at it. I’m not going to tell you otherwise unless you ask. That‘s between you and God and I want the same in return. Whether you agree or not.

When you say family what do you envision and what is the tangible correlation? How does manifest in the physical? I didn’t hear that principle growing up and we were believers as were my loved ones.

~bella

 

[Jerry N.]

Fair enough - the Fathers believe she was more than merely religious but rather was raised as a servant in the Temple, which is commemorated by the ancient feast of the Entry of the Theotokos. This would mean she would have been more associated with the predominantly Sadducee group which dominated the Kohanim and the Levites at that time (whereas Pharisees were more dominant in the synagogues, but there were Kohanim known to be Pharisees and there were synagogues more associated with the Sadducees. Both groups appear to have regarded the Essenes as heterodox, if not on the same level as the Samaritans (the probable descendants of Ephraim and Manessah), whose relationship with the Jews was spiteful, which is why our Lord intentionally used a Samaritan in the Parable of the Good Samaritan.

That is very interesting. I would not have thought that Mary was “associated with the predominantly Sadducee group.” As far as I can tell, Mary as a Temple virgin/servant comes from second century Protoevangelium of James. The idea that Jesus was associated with the Essenes has been mostly refuted, but I’m not quite sure it is the same with John the Baptist. As I have written before, I don’t think that the Catholic Church is evil, but I’m not convinced that it doesn’t have a larger portion of tradition mixed with Scripture than other denominations. This seems particularly evident in the views of Mary as evident in this exchange.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You have to accept there will always be differences and how we handle them is the linchpin. I’m squarely in the do you camp. Whatever you feel is best for you and yours have at it. I’m not going to tell you otherwise unless you ask. That‘s between you and God and I want the same in return. Whether you agree or not.

When you say family what do you envision and what is the tangible correlation? How does manifest in the physical? I didn’t hear that principle growing up and we were believers as were my loved ones.

~bella

Basically, the church "family" I envision would be one in which the first order of the day isn't to initiate a heretic hunt or to cast aspersions upon other Christians' character or salvation simply because they happen to disagree with some minute, interpretive ideas (other than sheer racism) about the Bible or about the central Christian tradition for which no one human being could possibly know with absolute certainty or with any comprehensive detail.

In other words, a milieu that doesn't feel like the mentally dysfunctional, nominally religious, socially ignorant family I grew up in....

 

[Amo2]

That is the narrative, but the facts differ.

Hard to be capable of figuring it out when a large portion of the population was illiterate.

Translations were being written deliberately to deny established dogma which had served the Church for over a millennia and still serve the Church today.
The translators were not making intellectual objections to be examined, that would be the humble path
Instead the translators deliberately wrote to provoke rebellion. They used an appeal to human nature to entice an illiterate generation unable to defend itself. Start a rumor that the Chruch is hiding things and deceiving people and the adage is demonstrated where a lie circles the globe seven times before the truth has time to tie its shoes.
It is human nature to rebel and difficult to remain humble. We have only to look at the counterculture of the 1960s to see how easily children can be convinced to rebel against their parents, and the rebellion is ongoing toward society. This is not godly behavior
God behaves according to the principle of Sabbath. God creates, then He rests. God builds the house and they labor in vain that claim to build another or reform by human hands what God has wrought
We have had 500 years to see the errors of the reformers. Their ideas have not resulted in a golden age of the Church, rather chaos of competition and abandonment of Christian truth because they know better and are able to reform God’s work. This just in…. They can’t
Sure they make a big show of it on the internet, but when examined, the teachings do not remain consistent. Just because someone cannot be convinced, does not make them automatically convincing
We see the abandonment of chastity as Christian teaching. The abandonment of development of virtue aka training in righteousness in favor of a mantra of “you can’t lose your salvation”, which results in abandonment of penance and removal of the horror of sin aka denial of the fear of the Lord
Some even say that evil will not be punished and evil does not result in eternal separation from God. They say punishment is temporary and evil will be annihilated which is reward of the peaceful sleep of death rather than the eternal fire warned against
Some say it is no longer sufficient to deny themselves and rest in Christ and Him crucified, the works of the old law must be added to avoid annihilation. They say you can’t be free from sin but are required to do these works to achieve God’s favor

They say you can never be free, don’t worry about sin in this life, don’t even think of doing penance out of love for God. Don’t try to follow the New Covenant, just keep the works of the Old
And stop worrying about sin and offending God. God will save you if you do these small works

Does this sound like the Gospel at all? Jesus said that He came that we might have life and that more abundantly, not that we would remain in the death of sin unable to break free. He said follow me, whom the Son sets free is free indeed. If you are dead to sin, how can you live any longer there in? He also said hell is eternal where the worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched.

Who do we believe? Christ who would set us free from sin? Or those that say we remain in the bondage of sin and must continue works of the law to maybe set free in an undetermined time in the future?

I know who I believe

Your above argument is built upon a false narrative. As is obvious, illiterate people did make translations of the bible into the common language of the people. Highly educated people who could read and understand scripture in the original languages, were convicted they they needed to translate bible truth in to the common languages of the people, and educate them to be able to read the scriptures for themselves. One of the main reasons they did this, was because they noticed that what the state established church taught and practiced did not line up with what they read in holy scripture, therefore the need for reform and education among the masses.

We most definitely did see all kinds of advances in education, knowledge, development, science, industry, wealth, and opportunity for countless more people than the papal system and feudalism of Europe provided for any but the elites. Namely clergy and royalty. Who quite apparently kept the larger portion of those they subjugated illiterate and uneducated. Which problem the translating of holy scripture immediately began to address with widespread interest in reading them, encouraging more people to learn to read, and more people wanting to teach others to read for this very purpose.

The apostasies or rebellion you speak of above are not due to people having the holy scriptures to read for themselves, or their freedom to do so and choose how to believe for themselves, but rather their abandonment of what the scriptures actually teach. Even within the history of Israel and the church we see the cycle of apostasy, reformation or revival, and the slide back again repeated over and over. The conditions of apostasy become unbearable, abuse runs wild, reformation and revival occur at great sacrifice, people begin to prosper accordingly again, later generations then take this for granted and slide right back into apostasy to repeat the cycle over and over. This is the history recorded in holy scripture even among God's people, let alone the history of the rest of this world.

As far as the development of political forms of atheism and secular humanism go, they were birthed into the modern world via unbridled Roman Catholic rule in France. After Protestantism was successfully ousted from France the disparity between the rich and poor under direct Catholic rule, became so great that the people of France rose up in rebellion and rejected the authority of the Roman Catholic church and God as well altogether. Establishing the supposed god of reason in His place, giving rise to the political entity of secular humanism we must deal with today. Protestantism did not create this beast, unbridled Catholic rule did. Meanwhile Protestant nations became increasingly prosperous and filled with literate and educated peoples.

Apart from all of the above, the price of educated freedom is and always has been high. Allowing for people to decide issues for themselves, and even be wrong if they so choose. God has not called upon His people or any other to subjugate others with mandated religious teaching or practice. It is the personal job of every professed Christian to provide moral guidance, teaching, example and influence, to those around them. If our light goes out, the world is certain to follow. Nevertheless, it has not ever been, it is not now, and it never will be the place of authentic Christianity, to establish their beliefs and way of life by way of civil mandates upon all. This is the spirit of antichrist, not our Lord Jesus Christ, who never did and or called for such a thing. Nor did any of His apostles. This was the problem that highly educated reformers addressed concerning abusive power wielded by the Roman Catholic church, in calling for the freedom of all to be able to read the scriptures for themselves. Enabling adults to decide for themselves what they will believe regarding it, or even if they will believe it at all. Which is the God given right of every person. which is why an overwhelmingly Protestant population of peoples DECLARED -

The Declaration of Independence

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness......................

This is exactly what Protestants and later what we consider Secular Humanists today did, in casting off the unbearable yoke of Roman Catholic intrusive and abusive rule. All of the above by the way, began to do so as Roman Catholics themselves, who were sick and tired of the Church and Royalty washing each others hands of the abuses they both committed against their own people. Not the least of which, was mandating their freedoms and liberties away. This is a no brainer for all and any who care to see the simple truth of the matter. So be it.

 

[Jerry N.]

Your above argument is built upon a false narrative. As is obvious, illiterate people did make translations of the bible into the common language of the people. Highly educated people who could read and understand scripture in the original languages, were convicted they they needed to translate bible truth in to the common languages of the people, and educate them to be able to read the scriptures for themselves. One of the main reasons they did this, was because they noticed that what the state established church taught and practiced did not line up with what they read in holy scripture, therefore the need for reform and education among the masses.

We most definitely did see all kinds of advances in education, knowledge, development, science, industry, wealth, and opportunity for countless more people than the papal system and feudalism of Europe provided for any but the elites. Namely clergy and royalty. Who quite apparently kept the larger portion of those they subjugated illiterate and uneducated. Which problem the translating of holy scripture immediately began to address with widespread interest in reading them, encouraging more people to learn to read, and more people wanting to teach others to read for this very purpose.

The apostasies or rebellion you speak of above are not due to people having the holy scriptures to read for themselves, or their freedom to do so and choose how to believe for themselves, but rather their abandonment of what the scriptures actually teach. Even within the history of Israel and the church we see the cycle of apostasy, reformation or revival, and the slide back again repeated over and over. The conditions of apostasy become unbearable, abuse runs wild, reformation and revival occur at great sacrifice, people begin to prosper accordingly again, later generations then take this for granted and slide right back into apostasy to repeat the cycle over and over. This is the history recorded in holy scripture even among God's people, let alone the history of the rest of this world.

As far as the development of political forms of atheism and secular humanism go, they were birthed into the modern world via unbridled Roman Catholic rule in France. After Protestantism was successfully ousted from France the disparity between the rich and poor under direct Catholic rule, became so great that the people of France rose up in rebellion and rejected the authority of the Roman Catholic church and God as well altogether. Establishing the supposed god of reason in His place, giving rise to the political entity of secular humanism we must deal with today. Protestantism did not create this beast, unbridled Catholic rule did. Meanwhile Protestant nations became increasingly prosperous and filled with literate and educated peoples.

Apart from all of the above, the price of educated freedom is and always has been high. Allowing for people to decide issues for themselves, and even be wrong if they so choose. God has not called upon His people or any other to subjugate others with mandated religious teaching or practice. It is the personal job of every professed Christian to provide moral guidance, teaching, example and influence, to those around them. If our light goes out, the world is certain to follow. Nevertheless, it has not ever been, it is not now, and it never will be the place of authentic Christianity, to establish their beliefs and way of life by way of civil mandates upon all. This is the spirit of antichrist, not our Lord Jesus Christ, who never did and or called for such a thing. Nor did any of His apostles. This was the problem that highly educated reformers addressed concerning abusive power wielded by the Roman Catholic church, in calling for the freedom of all to be able to read the scriptures for themselves. Enabling adults to decide for themselves what they will believe regarding it, or even if they will believe it at all. Which is the God given right of every person. which is why an overwhelmingly Protestant population of peoples DECLARED -



This is exactly what Protestants and later what we consider Secular Humanists today did, in casting off the unbearable yoke of Roman Catholic intrusive and abusive rule. All of the above by the way, began to do so as Roman Catholics themselves, who were sick and tired of the Church and Royalty washing each others hands of the abuses they both committed against their own people. Not the least of which, was mandating their freedoms and liberties away. This is a no brainer for all and any who care to see the simple truth of the matter. So be it.

Wonderful post, but there are nuances that I’m trying to figure out.

Certainly the Roman Church started down the road of corruption starting in about 380 A.D. with the execution anyone who refused to submit to the Pope. The Orthodox Churches fared better, but there has been plenty of corruption on a smaller scale. The problem is power and money. Leaders of the Church forsake the teachings of Christ for worldly gain. Protestants are not immune. One only has to look at the scandals in “Mega-churches.” Doctrinal issues are a bit different, but there is a big difference between what the early church fathers believed and what the average Catholic has believed though the ages. I have Catholic friends that believe in salvation by works, not because of church doctrine, but because that is the message they seem to receive from the Roman Church “between the lines.” The other problem is that there is a tendency to think that the Church will somehow give them a ticket to heaven rather than faith in Christ. It is as though you show your certificate of baptism at the gates of Heaven, and all is well. However, God is not hampered, and many Catholics are saved through faith in Christ. The Good News is basically preached in every Mass, whether the priest believes it or not. Personally, I wish that every saved Catholic would leave the church and find a better place to worship and fellowship, but I’m obviously wrong, based on my Christian friends in the Roman Church and many of the Catholic and Orthodox Christians you can find on this forum. That is the attraction to threads like this.

 

[Valletta]

That is very interesting. I would not have thought that Mary was “associated with the predominantly Sadducee group.” As far as I can tell, Mary as a Temple virgin/servant comes from second century Protoevangelium of James. The idea that Jesus was associated with the Essenes has been mostly refuted, but I’m not quite sure it is the same with John the Baptist. As I have written before, I don’t think that the Catholic Church is evil, but I’m not convinced that it doesn’t have a larger portion of tradition mixed with Scripture than other denominations. This seems particularly evident in the views of Mary as evident in this exchange.

Realize that the Catholic Church was thriving before one word of the New Testament was written. Based upon Sacred Tradition, and with the Holy Spirit guiding the Catholic Church, the Church, in a process that spanned centuries, chose the 73 books of the Bible. The canon was not finalized until the late 300s. So the Catholic Church indeed used and uses Sacred Tradition far more than any Protestant denominations,in fact many Protestant denominations adopted, or at least maintain they adopted, Bible-only denominations and say they reject all tradition. In fact they do follow some traditions that are not explicitly stated in the Bible, such as the understanding of the Holy Trinity.

 

[Valletta]

Certainly the Roman Church started down the road of corruption starting in about 380 A.D. with the execution anyone who refused to submit to the Pope.

What historical documentation can you cite from those times, the late 300s and early 400s, supporting your accusation that the Catholic Church executed anyone who refused to submit to the pope?

 

[Jerry N.]

What historical documentation can you cite from those times, the late 300s and early 400s, supporting your accusation that the Catholic Church executed anyone who refused to submit to the pope?

The Edict of Thessalonica | History Today, "In 385 A.D. Priscillian, Bishop of Avila, would be the first Christian to face judicial execution by other Christians for his beliefs."

 

[Jerry N.]

Realize that the Catholic Church was thriving before one word of the New Testament was written. Based upon Sacred Tradition, and with the Holy Spirit guiding the Catholic Church, the Church, in a process that spanned centuries, chose the 73 books of the Bible. The canon was not finalized until the late 300s. So the Catholic Church indeed used and uses Sacred Tradition far more than any Protestant denominations,in fact many Protestant denominations adopted, or at least maintain they adopted, Bible-only denominations and say they reject all tradition. In fact they do follow some traditions that are not explicitly stated in the Bible, such as the understanding of the Holy Trinity.

I wrote, “As I have written before, I don’t think that the Catholic Church is evil, but I’m not convinced that it doesn’t have a larger portion of tradition mixed with Scripture than other denominations.” All religions have some traditions that influence their doctrines. I just think that the Roman Catholic Church has more than average.

 

[Valletta]

The Edict of Thessalonica | History Today, "In 385 A.D. Priscillian, Bishop of Avila, would be the first Christian to face judicial execution by other Christians for his beliefs."

It was the Emperor, not the Catholic Church, who issued the edict. Five years later the first Christian was executed for violating the Emperor's edict. You claimed it was the Catholic Church that executed "anyone who refused to submit to the Pope." Quite the twisting and exaggeration. Heads of state, kings, Roman emperors, etc. throughout history executed those who did not go along with their religion, heresy. Have you seen A Man For ALL Seasons? Over a thousand years later rulers, in this case a Protestant ruler, were still executing those who did not go along with the state religion.

 

[Valletta]

I wrote, “As I have written before, I don’t think that the Catholic Church is evil, but I’m not convinced that it doesn’t have a larger portion of tradition mixed with Scripture than other denominations.” All religions have some traditions that influence their doctrines. I just think that the Roman Catholic Church has more than average.

Don't confuse mere "traditions" with the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church. Sacred Tradition was part of the deposit of the faith passed down from Jesus through the Apostles. A mere tradition might be lighting candles, or the Protestant canon of 66 Bibles which was decided upon over a thousand years after the Catholic Church canon, dropping seven books but using the same order of books decided by the Catholic Church. The early Catholic Church, based upon Sacred Tradition, decided which potential books for the Bible were God-breathed. Since the Catholic Church has been around for almost 2000 years I would not argue that they have more mere traditions, such as putting a cross on top of a church, making the sign of the cross when the name of Jesus is spoken, etc.

 

[Jerry N.]

It was the Emperor, not the Catholic Church, who issued the edict. Five years later the first Christian was executed for violating the Emperor's edict. You claimed it was the Catholic Church that executed "anyone who refused to submit to the Pope." Quite the twisting and exaggeration. Heads of state, kings, Roman emperors, etc. throughout history executed those who did not go along with their religion, heresy. Have you seen A Man For ALL Seasons? Over a thousand years later rulers, in this case a Protestant ruler, were still executing those who did not go along with the state religion.

My point was that was the start of the Church exercising worldly power in cooperation with the state. When the state and church increasingly merged, it got worse. I probably should have used a later date to make it clearer. I’m not bashing the doctrines of the Roman Church, even though I disagree with some of it, I was pointing out the corruption of civil power it exercised. I have particular problems with Luther too, but that is not the topic of this thread.

 

[Jerry N.]

Don't confuse mere "traditions" with the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church. Sacred Tradition was part of the deposit of the faith passed down from Jesus through the Apostles. A mere tradition might be lighting candles, or the Protestant canon of 66 Bibles which was decided upon over a thousand years after the Catholic Church canon, dropping seven books but using the same order of books decided by the Catholic Church. The early Catholic Church, based upon Sacred Tradition, decided which potential books for the Bible were God-breathed. Since the Catholic Church has been around for almost 2000 years I would not argue that they have more mere traditions, such as putting a cross on top of a church, making the sign of the cross when the name of Jesus is spoken, etc.

I don’t see how “traditions” and “Sacred Traditions” are an important division outside the Roman Church. Believe what you like, but they are traditions just the same. I’m not going to write that traditions are bad. I follow many myself. I’m just writing that the Roman Church seems to have more than some protestant churches. Those Roman traditions disagree with some protestant doctrines. I was just trying to define the problem with “the Roman Church is evil,” which I don’t believe.

 

[Amo2]

Wonderful post, but there are nuances that I’m trying to figure out.

Certainly the Roman Church started down the road of corruption starting in about 380 A.D. with the execution anyone who refused to submit to the Pope. The Orthodox Churches fared better, but there has been plenty of corruption on a smaller scale. The problem is power and money. Leaders of the Church forsake the teachings of Christ for worldly gain. Protestants are not immune. One only has to look at the scandals in “Mega-churches.” Doctrinal issues are a bit different, but there is a big difference between what the early church fathers believed and what the average Catholic has believed though the ages. I have Catholic friends that believe in salvation by works, not because of church doctrine, but because that is the message they seem to receive from the Roman Church “between the lines.” The other problem is that there is a tendency to think that the Church will somehow give them a ticket to heaven rather than faith in Christ. It is as though you show your certificate of baptism at the gates of Heaven, and all is well. However, God is not hampered, and many Catholics are saved through faith in Christ. The Good News is basically preached in every Mass, whether the priest believes it or not. Personally, I wish that every saved Catholic would leave the church and find a better place to worship and fellowship, but I’m obviously wrong, based on my Christian friends in the Roman Church and many of the Catholic and Orthodox Christians you can find on this forum. That is the attraction to threads like this.

Yes, Protestants have been guilty of persecutions and murder in the name of Christ as well. The problem is almost always the same. Apostate Christinas empowered by the state, just end up persecuting. These powers must be and remain separated. This is what Protestants eventually learned, and established by the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of these United States. Which the minority of Catholics within this nation at that time, the Rationalists of the day (Secular Humanists), majority Protestants, and others all agreed upon and backed up. This they did without the approval of the Popes and the Vatican, but rather in contradiction to the same.

May God preserve liberty and justice for all, and prevent the left or right from overstepping the bounds of restraint our founding documents and fathers intended to keep in check. The progressive left has wanted to mandate their own views or faith if you will, upon all, and we seem to be succeeding in over throwing those intentions. May we be able to succeed, without then going overboard ourselves and attempting to mandate our views and or faith upon them or any other.

 

[Valletta]

I don’t see how “traditions” and “Sacred Traditions” are an important division outside the Roman Church. Believe what you like, but they are traditions just the same. I’m not going to write that traditions are bad. I follow many myself. I’m just writing that the Roman Church seems to have more than some protestant churches. Those Roman traditions disagree with some protestant doctrines. I was just trying to define the problem with “the Roman Church is evil,” which I don’t believe.

Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture make up the Word of God, that which was passed down from Jesus through the Apostles which we call the deposit of the faith. The understanding of the Holy Trinity, one God, three Persons, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, is Sacred Tradition. Using candles for mass and a wreath at Christmas and a cross on top of a church are mere traditions, traditions of man. Teachings of the Catholic Church of course differ from Protestant teachings.

 

[Valletta]

Yes, Protestants have been guilty of persecutions and murder in the name of Christ as well. The problem is almost always the same. Apostate Christinas empowered by the state, just end up persecuting. These powers must be and remain separated. This is what Protestants eventually learned, and established by the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of these United States. Which the minority of Catholics within this nation at that time, the Rationalists of the day (Secular Humanists), majority Protestants, and others all agreed upon and backed up. This they did without the approval of the Popes and the Vatican, but rather in contradiction to the same.

There was only one Catholic who signed the Declaration of Independence, remember there was strong anti-Catholicism. For example, Catholic settlers were banned in the Massachusetts Bay colony as well as and in the Province of Maryland. I don't recall every hearing about popes and the Vatican being against the Declaration, a number of principals in the Declaration were Catholic ideas before the Protestant signers were born. In fact the pope appointed the cousin of the only Catholic signer of the Declaration of Independence as a bishop, and that bishop wrote a prayer for the United States of America. George Washington was helpful in preventing some of the anti-Catholicism, Pope Night was ended in America although I personally have twice been in Protestant countries when Guy Fawkes Day was celebrated--it made me feel uncomfortable.

 

[The Liturgist]

comes from second century Protoevangelium of James.

No, it comes from the Orthodox liturgy, and thence from the Truth, which in turn the Protoevangelion tried to summarize, in the same way that there are books that summarixe other events connected with the early church referred to in the liturgy but not unambiguously in the Scripture itself.

That said had the early church known of the problem of crypto-Nestorianism they would have probably put the Protoevangelion in the canon.

It should be noted that the liturgy itself was always understood to be protocanon in the most protocanonical sense - precanon you might call it. The importance of a scriptural text is directly proportionate to how often and under what conditions the liturgy uses it, which is why Psalm 151 is canonical but deuterocanonical, since it is not part of the liturgical Psalter in the ancient liturgies, that is to say, it was never appointed to be sung in church, unlike the other 159, so if one sings it one does so as a supplemental devotion.

 

[Valletta]

8. HELL​

Having already established the scriptural evidence against the immortality of the soul, the reader will understand of course, that such evidence is also against the doctrine of eternal torment. As is the case with most false doctrines, there are a few verses that seem to suggest the existence of such a place, but the overwhelming majority of scriptural evidence is to the contrary. The doctrine of eternal torment is just another lie supporting the original lie of Satan to humanity, that we would not surely die.

It is the writers opinion that the doctrine of eternal hell maligns the character of God more than any other single doctrine. If one combines the false doctrines of eternal torment, and predestination, they have made God out to be more of a tyrant than Satan himself ever was. If these two false doctrines were the truth, then God would have created countless millions of people for no other purpose than to burn them in hell throughout the endless ages of eternity.

We have already discussed John 3:16, and the meaning of the word perish in a previous chapter. The following are some more scriptures that point out that the wicked will perish, and therefore, will not be burning in a fire throughout the endless ages of eternity.

Ps 37:20But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.

Ps 68:1 Let God arise, let his enemies be scattered: let them also that hate him flee before him. 2 As smoke is driven away, so drive them away: as wax melteth before the fire, so let the wicked perish at the presence of God. 3 But let the righteous be glad; let them rejoice before God: yea, let them exceedingly rejoice.

Ps 73:27 For, lo, they that are far from thee shall perish: thou hast destroyed all them that go a whoring from thee.

Ps 112:10 The wicked shall see it, and be grieved; he shall gnash with his teeth, and melt away: the desire of the wicked shall perish.

Isa 41:11 Behold, all they that were incensed against thee shall be ashamed and confounded: they shall be as nothing; and they that strive with thee shall perish. 12 Thou shalt seek them, and shalt not find them, even them that contended with thee: they that war against thee shall be as nothing, and as a thing of nought.

1 Cor 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. 18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

II Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

2 Pet 2:12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;

2 Pet 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

As discussed earlier, there is a great difference between being alive and burning for eternity, and perishing altogether. It is not possible for both of these things to happen to the wicked. The reality of either one, would completely negate the other. The scriptures do clearly point out, that the punishment of the wicked will be by fire. This fire is referred to as eternal fire in the book of Jude. However, it is obvious from the context of this scripture that it is the effects of this fire that are eternal, and not the fire itself.

Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

In the above verse we are given an example of the effects of eternal fire. Sodom and Gomorrha are no more. They were completely destroyed by eternal fire, and have quite surely perished. If they were still burning today, then some might be able to argue that eternal fire meant being burned for eternity. Since they no longer exist, it is obvious that the meaning of eternal fire, is the complete annihilation of the thing suffering its effects.

Let’s take another look at John 3:16 and a few other verses that point out the love of God for humanity.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

I Jn 4: 7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. 8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. 9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. 10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

I Jn 4:16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.

Matt 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

How could God tell us that he is love, and that we should love our enemies, and do good to them that hate us, when in fact, he intends to torture all his enemies throughout the endless ages of eternity? What better way to destroy God's message of love to humanity, than to tell them that if they don't worship him he will roast them in flames, keeping them alive for eternity, just so they can feel the pain of being burned? What nonsense, this mentality contradicts the bibles own definition of love. This doctrine comes straight from the Devil for the purpose of destroying God's message of love and mercy to a dying world. Anyone who believes it, cannot understand or know the true character of God. Nor can they understand or know true love, which God is.

Even humanity becomes outraged when confronted with people or organizations that exhibit great cruelty to animals, let alone people. We know this behavior is wrong, and yet Christians all over the world present a God that will exhibit infinite cruelty, and then try to tell people that this is a God of love. What must their conception of love be?

We are God's children, what parent in their right mind, would choose to torture, for as long as possible, their wayward child? Sin is a death producing disease. Even humanity knows to put a sick and suffering animal out of its misery. Do we believe that humanity has more mercy than God himself? What would any people, let alone Christians say to a government that tortured its criminals to death for their crimes? This would not be acceptable, and rightly so. So why do so many Christians believe the thing to be so of God himself? The church of Rome itself, believing this doctrine, tortured and killed millions of people in what we now refer to as the dark ages. Many protestant churches followed in suite when they became the established church of the state, or country. This was no doubt the result of believing this satanic lie. If God is this way, why shouldn't his followers be the same?

Many Christians today are crying out against the death penalty as being too cruel. No doubt many of these same Christians believe in eternal hell. If they believe that God will burn sinners in hell forever, why do they believe that the death penalty is too harsh? Are they more merciful than God?

Ps 136:1 O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever. 2 O give thanks unto the God of gods: for his mercy endureth for ever. 3 O give thanks to the Lord of lords: for his mercy endureth for ever. 4 To him who alone doeth great wonders: for his mercy endureth for ever. 5 To him that by wisdom made the heavens: for his mercy endureth for ever. 6 To him that stretched out the earth above the waters: for his mercy endureth for ever. 7 To him that made great lights: for his mercy endureth for ever: 8 The sun to rule by day: for his mercy endureth for ever: 9 The moon and stars to rule by night: for his mercy endureth for ever. 10 To him that smote Egypt in their firstborn: for his mercy endureth for ever: 11 And brought out Israel from among them: for his mercy endureth for ever: 12 With a strong hand, and with a stretched out arm: for his mercy endureth for ever. 13 To him which divided the Red sea into parts: for his mercy endureth for ever: 14 And made Israel to pass through the midst of it: for his mercy endureth for ever: 15 But overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red sea: for his mercy endureth for ever. 16 To him which led his people through the wilderness: for his mercy endureth for ever. 17 To him which smote great kings: for his mercy endureth for ever: 18 And slew famous kings: for his mercy endureth for ever: 19 Sihon king of the Amorites: for his mercy endureth for ever: 20 And Og the king of Bashan: for his mercy endureth for ever: 21 And gave their land for an heritage: for his mercy endureth for ever: 22 Even an heritage unto Israel his servant: for his mercy endureth for ever. 23 Who remembered us in our low estate: for his mercy endureth for ever: 24 And hath redeemed us from our enemies: for his mercy endureth for ever. 25 Who giveth food to all flesh: for his mercy endureth for ever. 26 O give thanks unto the God of heaven: for his mercy endureth for ever.

God's mercy endureth for ever. How can God punish countless millions upon millions throughout the endless ages of eternity, and at the same time have mercy that endures forever? These two things cannot be at the same time. One must be false. Which is it, that God's mercy endureth forever, or that the wicked will suffer eternally? I do not worship a vindictive God. My God has done, and is doing everything possible to save a lost world. His love is beyond our comprehension and does not allow for a spirit of eternal vengeance. How can one say that they are love itself, and also be one that will seek and distribute utter vengeance throughout all eternity?

Isa 49:15 Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee. 16 Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me.

Our Lord and savior Jesus Christ died for each and every human being that has ever, and will ever exist. His love for us is everlasting. The love and mercy of God revealed to us through His Son, and recorded in the scriptures, cannot be applied to a God that would create and sustain a place of eternal torment. This doctrine is just another teaching which separates humanity from the love of God.

Jesus was clear on hell:
Matthew 8:12 while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness; there men will weep and gnash their teeth.” RSVCE

I urge everyone not to be deceived, Satan never sleeps:

Shining as Lights in the World​

Phil 2:12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; RSVCE

 

[The Liturgist]

although I personally have twice been in Protestant countries when Guy Fawkes Day was celebrated

We don’t celebrate it in the US, and I would also note the Wachowski Brothers in the film V for Vendetta did Roman Catholics a service by subverting that event and turning Guy Fawkes into a heroic figure for millennials.