AM I WRONG FOR FEELING A LITTLE UNEASY WITH THIS NEW SPACE FORCE LOGO?
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (252)
sorted by:
Martin Luther remove the seven books. for there to be 15, the Catholic church would have had to remove eight, they did not. The books that were removed by Martin Luther coincidentally were the same books removed by the Jews in 90 AD as they were leading too many people to Christianity because they were prophetic in relation to Jesus. Martin Luther had no authority under the church. Jesus gave that to his disciples. His disciples, later, the Catholic Church, have been guided by the holy Spirit for 2,000 years. The dogma of the church is very specific. Can never be changed because it cannot be wrong because God cannot be wrong because it is completely inspired by the holy Spirit. This is why Pope Francis cannot make changes to the dogma. He can only put encyclical letters out that are not binding in any way for members of the church to follow. There is a whole process for adding dogma and it takes at times hundreds of years for Cardinals to reach a consensus. If you look at your current King James Bible it follows what Martin Luther did do the good book. You currently have the Catholic Bible minus the seven books that Martin Luther threw out as did the Jews.
There's a lot to unpack here and much of it is wrong.
Martin Luther has absolutely nothing to do with the King James Version, for starters. Luther translated the Latin Vulgate into German because he did not know Greek or Hebrew.
Secondly, the King James Version contained all 15 books of the Apocrypha in 1611.
Thirdly, the Roman Catholic Church claims it is descended from the apostles and that Peter was the first Pope.
The insider elites even claim to the profane the Pope sits on a throne marked by an upside down cross because Peter was crucified upside down.
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/st-peter-prince-of-the-apostles-5142
Rather than answer my four questions about the Holy Spirit working through the Roman Catholic Church, you instead ranted about Pope Francis being unable to make changes to the dogma and attributed that to the Holy Spirit protecting the Roman Catholic Church from error.
Are you claiming Pope Francis is unable to speak ex cathedra and set any dogma he so desires? And if he did so, would you remain a Roman Catholic? In fact, you're a heretic according to the Council of Trent if you dare to question Pope Francis's authority.
What about the Pope's endorsement of the mRNA vaccines? Shouldn't that be enough to question what the hell is going on?
Maybe your position is that Francis is an antipope, which means you're a sedevacantist? If so, I congratulate you in taking the first step out of Babylon.
Why did the Roman Catholic Church remove the Book of Enoch? That's the question you should be asking.
Very informative posts and very well argued and with a concise rebuttal. Very impressive fren.
The Pope has no authority of the Church, the Body of Christ represented by the Cardinals are what determines dogma. And to answer your question, no, I don't believe he is able to speak Ex cathedra. There have been many anti-Popes, and that does not mean those who disagreed were Sede Vacantists.
Apocrypha, well thats a neat way to explain away books you discarded from your Bible. The Roman Catholic church was founded based on Gods love for man, the King James version is based on the Sin of Adultery.
I disagree with the Popes position on mRna vaccines, and if you read his statement, he states that those with firmly held positions against may refrain from taking it.
Regarding enoch, https://ashokstambh.com/why-was-the-book-of-enoch-removed-from-the-bible/
Just because the Holy Spirit did not include a book in the Bible does not mean it is not relevant, it just didn't rise to the level of divinity.
You still have not answer the question of who removed the books (Luther) and under what authority (He had none)
So the Buddhists are right?
https://ashokstambh.com/story-behind-the-ashok-chakra/
Sorry, but angels mated with mankind and that's the reason they became fallen angels in the first place.
There's a reason the occultists practice "Enochian magick." They know the fallen angels described in that book are real.
Matthew 16:18
And 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.
Roman Catholics claim this verse means Peter was the first Pope.
5 verses later-
Matthew 16:23
But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
In reality, Peter is Cephas and Cephas means pebble. Peter is the pebble and Jesus is the rock and the chief cornerstone and the foundation.
Peter wasn't the first Pope and Linus wasn't the second Pope.
The term Apocrypha is not even a term which originated with the Protestants.
It's a Latin term and it was used by the early Church fathers to describe those 15 books which were included in the 1611 King James version as intertestamental texts, books that were disregarded as canon and divinely inspired.
Funny how you actually agree with the Reformers and don't even know it...
Just because the Holy Spirit did not include a book in the Bible does not mean it is not relevant, it just didn't rise to the level of divinity.
Also, Luther included all of the Apocryphal books in his German Bible except for 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras. You ask on what authority he removed those?
Pope Clement VIII wrote a Papal Bull ordering that 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Mannaseh to be placed in the The Appendix to the Clementine Vulgate, the bible which replaced Jerome's Latin Vulgate as the official bible of the Roman Catholic Church from 1592 until 1979.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixto-Clementine_Vulgate
You kept claiming there were 7 books removed by the Reformers, which is completely inaccurate, because they didn't remove any of them.
In fact, the King James contained 15 Apocryphal books and the Roman Catholic Bible only contains 7 of them, which is why you keep saying 7 books and not 15.
From the Catholic Encyclopedia article "Canon of the Old Testament"-
The terms protocanonical and deuterocanonical, of frequent usage among Catholic theologians and exegetes, require a word of caution. They are not felicitous, and it would be wrong to infer from them that the Church successively possessed two distinct Biblical Canons. Only in a partial and restricted way may we speak of a first and second Canon. Protocanonical (protos, "first") is a conventional word denoting those sacred writings which have been always received by Christendom without dispute. The protocanonical books of the Old Testament correspond with those of the Bible of the Hebrews, and the Old Testament as received by Protestants. The deuterocanonical (deuteros, "second") are those whose Scriptural character was contested in some quarters, but which long ago gained a secure footing in the Bible of the Catholic Church, though those of the Old Testament are classed by Protestants as the "Apocrypha". These consist of seven books: Tobias, Judith, Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, First and Second Machabees; also certain additions to Esther and Daniel.
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm
Does it matter if you call the books deuterocanonical or use Jerome's Latin term Apocrypha? And considering the Catholic Church admits "the deuterocanonical (deuteros, "second") are those whose Scriptural character was contested in some quarters", and those who disputed their divinity were many of the early Church fathers who Roman Catholic claim as their own, what exactly is the point you're trying to make anyways?
That the Pope has ultimate authority? But not the current Pope, because he's an Anti-Pope?
By the way, all popes go by the term "The Vicar of Christ", which means "In place of Christ" and they are all Anti-christs as far as I'm concerned.